- Decision
- dismissed, 22 September 2026
- Decided by
- Planning Inspector: S Leonard
- Authority
- Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole (South West)
- Appeal reference
- 6012915
- Application reference
- P/26/01806/FUL
- Procedure
- written representations
- Development
- BT Street Hub replacing a payphone (Appeal A) and two 75-inch digital advert screens (Appeal B 6012919, P/26/01805/ADV)
- Site context
- inside settlement, conservation area, listed building setting
- Green Belt
- No
- Framework applied
- August 2026 NPPF
- Determinative policies
- HE6(4), HE6(1), HE6(3)
- Development plan policies
- Poole Local Plan 2012 PP6, PP27, PP30, Poole Town Centre SPD 2015, Our Streets and Spaces SPD 2012
- Main issues
- conservation area and listed building setting; visual amenity (advert)
Summary
BT Street Hub replacing a kiosk on Chapel Lane in Poole's town-centre conservation area, in views of a Grade II listed Art Deco shopfront. Both appeals dismissed. This is one of the clearest post-2026 heritage balances in this slice. Harm is characterised only as not "substantial", with no "less than substantial" label. HE6(3) considerable importance and weight and HE6(1) substantial weight to conservation are both stated, and single-hub telecoms benefits got moderate weight.
Issues and findings
- Transition. The revised Framework "does not differ significantly from the 2024 Framework in respect of the substance of the matters before me" (DL ¶9).
- Conservation area. "The combined bulk, mass and solidity of the street hub … would result in a significant visual intrusion into the streetscape" and would "erode the perceived spacious streetscape of the lane" (DL ¶21-22).
- Listed setting. The hub "would introduce an incongruous structure which would draw the eye and detract from the appreciation of the attractive shopfront of the listed building" (DL ¶25).
- Harm grading. "Having regard to the scale of the proposal, I do not find the harm to the TCHCA and the setting of the Listed Building to be substantial" (DL ¶34).
- Balance. "any harm to a designated heritage asset will be a matter of considerable importance and weight" (DL ¶35). "I give moderate weight to the aforesaid benefits of the provision of a single street hub" (DL ¶37). "the new Framework requires substantial weight to be given to the asset's conservation, with the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. I am not persuaded that the moderate benefits of the proposal outweigh the harm" (DL ¶38).
- Alternatives. "insufficient substantive evidence … that the aforesaid benefits of the proposal could not be achieved in a less harmful way by locating the proposal in a less sensitive location" (DL ¶39).
Planning balance
HE6(4) harm against public benefits, framed by HE6(1) and HE6(3). The harm was treated as a single "not substantial" category with no sub-grade.
What made the difference
A spacious, uncluttered lane forming a visual link in the conservation area, plus a listed shopfront in view. Benefits that could be delivered elsewhere carried only moderate weight.
Transferable points
- The 2026 heritage sequence in full: check whether harm is substantial (HE6(5)); if not, apply HE6(3) considerable importance and weight and HE6(1) substantial weight to conservation, then weigh against public benefits under HE6(4) (DL ¶34-38).
- Location-independent public benefits lose force where the applicant has not shown a less sensitive site is unavailable (DL ¶39).
- Removing off-site kiosks is a real heritage enhancement elsewhere, but it does not offset harm at the appeal site (DL ¶40-42).
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(5) | not-engaged | "Having regard to the scale of the proposal, I do not find the harm ... to be substantial" — binary substantial / not-substantial framing, no "less than substantial" label and no further grade (DL 34) | |
| HE6(4) | harm | considerable | HE6(3) "considerable importance and weight" and HE6(1) "substantial weight ... the more important the asset, the greater the weight" both stated; s66/s72 cited; harm to Town Centre Heritage CA (spacious lane, views) and setting of Grade II 34 Hill Street (Art Deco shopfront) (DL 10, 20-26, 35, 38) |
| CO1 | benefit | moderate | Wi-Fi, charging, 4G/5G, emergency access, wayfinding, carbon-free, sensors — moderate weight for a single hub; no CO1 substantial-weight language; no evidence benefits could not be had in a less sensitive location (DL 32, 36-39) |
Key facts
- 3m hub next to Jobcentre on open, uncluttered Chapel Lane linking High Street with car park trees (DL 13-20)
- Removal of two High Street kiosks would enhance the CA but is off-site and does not offset (DL 40-42)
- Framework "does not differ significantly from the 2024 Framework in respect of the substance"; no consultation (DL 8-9)
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.