A council has ordered a café to remove an "inappropriate" sign following a resident's complaint to the council. Mohammed Akhtar, the owner of a café on Govanhill has appealed to the Scottish Government after Glasgow City Council said he had to remove the sign above Mi Chaii on Victoria Road.
However, a Scottish Government-appointed independent reporter agreed the sign breached planning rules and should be pulled down. Officials from the council had slapped an enforcement notice in April as the “use of the site for a projecting sign above fascia level is inappropriate and incongruent” on a B-listed building and in Crosshill conservation area.
As reported by Glasgow Live, the council said the location “jars with traditional storefront design which characterises the area” and was contrary to council policy, which states signs should not “obscure or dominate the architectural details of the building” and lettering should “relate to the architectural style and character of the building”. Guidance also states that hand-painted or non-illuminated lettering is preferred for fascia signs.
Strict signage rules includes lettering or logos should be no greater than 2/3rds the depth of any original fascia. For projecting signs, any illuminated box signs and spotlights should be “sensitively related to the design and detailing of the building”.
Officials had investigated the coffee shop at 505 Victoria Road following a complaint from a resident. Mr Akhtar chose to appeal as he believed the “sign is no different than the other signs located in Victoria Road that are projecting above the fascia level”.
He argued the sign complied with conditions. In response to the appeal, the council “strongly disputed” the cafe owner’s claim.
It added the sign “fails local development plan policy due to being installed above the fascia level. It is considered to be inappropriate for the listed building on which it is situated as well as the wider conservation area.
“It should be noted that the photographs provided with the appeal would indicate that the notice may have been interpreted as targeting the fascia signage. For the avoidance of doubt, this is not the case, and the advertising targeted is the projecting sign.”
The independent reporter, Ailie Callan, appointed by the Scottish Government, visited the site and upheld the enforcement notice. The reporter concluded the sign required advertisement consent and as “there is no evidence and the appellant has not advised that such consent has been granted, I find that a breach of advertisement control has occurred”.
Callan added: “On my site inspection, I saw that the sign has been fixed directly to the brickwork of the front elevation of the building between two first floor windows above the premises. The appellant advises in his appeal statement that, in his opinion, the sign is no different to other signs in Victoria Road that are projecting above the fascia level.
“However the enforcement action sought by the council is for the removal of the projecting sign, above the fascia level of the store front. None of the examples provided in the appellant’s evidence relate to projecting signs.”
