- Decision
- dismissed, 30 September 2026
- Decided by
- Planning Inspector: Edward Dade
- Authority
- Ashford (South East)
- Appeal reference
- 6011714
- Application reference
- PA/2025/2072
- Procedure
- written representations
- Development
- Retrospective listed building consent for alterations to a shopfront including a light-green ground-floor sign on a Grade II terrace (Appeal A; the first-floor sign Appeal B is 6011717)
- Site context
- inside settlement, conservation area, listed building setting
- Green Belt
- No
- Framework applied
- August 2026 NPPF
- Determinative policies
- HE6(4), HE6(3)
- Development plan policies
- Ashford Local Plan 2019 SP1, SP6, ENV13, Tenterden Neighbourhood Plan TEN NP4
- Main issues
- special interest of Grade II listed building and character of Tenterden Conservation Area
Summary
Retrospective listed building consent for an estate agent's light-green ground-floor sign on a Grade II terrace in Tenterden was refused on appeal, together with the linked first-floor sign (6011717). The sign is the same size as the white one it replaced, but its bright corporate colour clashes with the brick and white weatherboarding. The moderate harm was not outweighed, as the business benefits could be had with sympathetic signage.
Issues and findings
- Transition. "The Framework maintains the overarching objective to conserve and enhance the historic environment, and those provisions do not differ materially from the policy framework addressed in the parties' submissions" (DL ¶4). Not consulted.
- Significance. "Although this building type may not be unusual locally, rarity is not the only measure of special interest" (DL ¶11).
- Harm from colour. "by virtue of its colour, the Appeal A sign significantly differs in visual impact from the signage it replaces, and is visually prominent, detracting from the character, appearance and special interest of the listed building" (DL ¶17).
- Degree and weight. "each sign gives rise to a moderate degree of harm. Nonetheless, I give these harms considerable importance and weight" (DL ¶24).
- HE6(4): FAIL. "it is unclear why these benefits could not be achieved through signage which is sensitive to the building's special interest" (DL ¶25).
Planning balance
HE6(4), with HE6(1) stated (DL ¶24–25). Development plan policies treated only as material considerations, as s38(6) does not apply to listed building consent (DL ¶6).
What made the difference
Colour. The same-sized predecessor was white and kept the building's palette; the corporate green does not. A sign in a sympathetic colour would probably have been acceptable, as the Council had consented signage before.
Transferable points
- The colour of a sign alone can harm a listed building where it breaks the building's material palette (DL ¶16–17).
- Common building types still have special interest; rarity is not the only measure (DL ¶11).
- Business benefits of corporate branding fail HE6(4) where a sensitive design could deliver them (DL ¶21–22, ¶25).
Policy findings
Policy codes are those of the National Planning Policy Framework (August 2026) unless a development plan is named.
| Policy | Finding | Weight | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| HE6(1) | harm | substantial | substantial weight to conservation stated (DL 24) |
| HE6(3) | harm | considerable | bright light-green corporate sign between the bow windows, replacing a white sign of the same size; out of keeping with the brick and white weatherboard palette; moderate harm to the listed terrace and the Tenterden CA (DL 16-17, 23-24) |
| HE6(4) | fail | continued Class E use and support for the historic shopping centre claimed; unclear why these could not be achieved with sensitive signage (DL 22, 25) |
Key facts
- Grade II terrace 2-22 Ashford Road (list entry 1374500), mid-19th century, listed 1950 (DL 9-10)
- Retrospective; works complete (DL 7)
- Parties not consulted on the 2026 Framework, as heritage provisions do not differ materially and s16(2) is the principal test (DL 4)
- Corporate branding at other, unlisted branches no justification (DL 21)
Related decisions
Sources
This note is one of the decisions behind the NPPF 2026 Navigator, which shows how each Framework test has been applied across all the decisions in the database. Also available as Markdown.