I was hoping to tap into some of the knowledge gained by people who have opposed the IMAX advertising. (Or elsewhere.)
Pimlico Plumbers are seeking permission for a new illuminated advertising hoarding above their premises alongside the Waterloo mainline. I understand from neighbours who have seen the plans that it will be an LED display, on 24 hours a day, presumably moving and flashing.
Unfortunately it will shine right into my son's bedroom on the other side of the railway line. I spoke to a nice sounding man in Lambeth planning about making an objection and the grounds on which I might do so. From what I understood there are not many. Our natural concern is that the advertising would make my sons room unsuitable for use as a bedroom, which would be difficult as he is a teenager and would not want to share with his sister. But this objection seems to fall into the category of "reducing the value of our house" which is not allowable. (My view is that since we dont plan to sell our house anytime soon we are not bothered about the value - but we are concerned about the amenity of our house, and we sould be able to protect that. But apparently not.)
Our side of the railway line is Conservation area, and the houses are listed. Our experience in trying to gain permission to rebuild a late Victorian outhouse, is that Lambeth are amazingly fastidious, timeconsuming and inconsistent to the extent that it is not worth even applying for permission. Yet as long as this proposal falls with overall policies on advertising hoardings, it is unclear whether we have any grounds on which to object to this and will have to hope that Network Rail won't want flashing lights in train-driver's faces.
Does anyone know anything about Lambeth's policies on advertising, or a way in which I could make the amenity argument in a way which would count.
And if anyone is inclined to object to an increase in illuminated and intrusive advertising in North Lambeth on principle, or to oppose the prescedent in case the IMAX and others try to follow, the reference is 09/01536/ADV. If you PM I can give more details. The deadline for objections is 24 June.
Flipping heck Sarah that will be dreadful, why does it have to be on for 24hrs? It's bad enough when I sit in my living room and see the moving ad.up and down on the bus shelter and have to close the curtain or move seats.
What about the light pollution lobby? at least in the 40s and 50s us cockney kids could see a starry sky. Now modern children will think its a myth that stars twinkle in a navy blue sky...:-(
I am afraid I cannot help with the planning side, but there is such a thing as nuisance in law: that is an activity or state of affairs which interferes with the use or enjoyment of land. You can get damages or an injunction.
It should be worth researching this further, and a letter to Pimlico Plumbers pointing out your reasonable concerns may be all you need to stop the illuminated sign, or reach an agreement so it is not lit at night.
Personally I do not think your objection is about reducing the value of your house. It is about enjoyment of your own home and any reduction is clearly incidental.
I have yet to access the application on line (if that is indeed possible) but understand that Pimlico Plumbers argue that the sign will not create problems for us because we have thick curtains.
Actually we don't as the house is tall and thin, with very thick walls so all the heat funnels through to the top. The only way to keep the temperature down in summer is to have all the windows and doors of the top floor open to create a draught, and have thin curtains.
I can understand where Pimlico Plumbers are coming from....but am hoping that the system will balance our interests against their natural desire to make money.