Opinion: Westminsters plans to ditch ‘For Sale’ signs abuses localism powers
Deemed ‘outdated’ in the digital age, Westminster City Council unveiled ‘For Sale’ will be axed from the borough. However, Rico Wojtulewicz of the National Federation of Builders (NFB), examines what the plan means for businesses and how it abuses ‘localism’ powers.
In May 2025 Westminster City Council will seek to ban ‘For Sale’ signage across the borough, adding to the growing list of localist powers that are being misused by councils through tacit nods to NIMBYism – a term used to describe the opposition of residents to proposed developments – and the creation of new revenue streams.
Misuse of localism powers
Abuse of ‘localism’ powers is not uncommon across the country. In 2024, the NFB highlighted opposition to homes because no dog-walking routes were offered. This issue was resolved through a chargeable planning condition to provide dog walking route maps to new build occupants.
In another case, planners requested apple trees to be planted, only to force a change of decision, in case the fruit was either used as a projectile or be left to rot so becoming a slipping hazard.
In 2023, the NFB wrote a piece titled ‘No houses, no roads, no pizza, and definitely no ice cream!’, which outlined how several local planning policies had strongly entwined localism with NIMBYism and demonstrated how localism now extends its tentacles into shaping local people’s lifestyle choices and how local business should operate.
Westminster knows ‘best’
Under Article 7 of the Town and Country Planning Regulations 2007, Westminster City Council already has a ban on ‘For Sale’ signage in some conservation areas, and so to ensure there is not a ‘two tier’ system, it is no seeking to expand this ban to the entire borough while ensuring the rules remain indefinite, so they do not have to revisit the decision for another 15 years.
The proposal cites ‘substantial harm to visual amenity and local character,’ abuse of deemed consent rules’ and meeting their ‘Fairer Westminster’ objectives as the main reasoning. Additionally referencing climate change – due to the carbon impacts of producing signs – and the growth of online advertising as further grounds.
However, it is clear to see that Westminster Council’s arguments don’t hold water:
- Unauthorised ‘For Sale’ boards have decreased dramatically from 511 in 2013 to just 18 in 2023. Since 2021, 21 violations have been resolved informally.
- Although some estate agents will list their entire stock on online platforms such as ‘Rightmove,’ most do not because of the high costs, and some do not use them at all.
- Boards not only highlight that a property is available for sale, which in some areas can be rarity, but serves to advertise locally employing businesses.
- Unlike large agents and their franchisees, small local estate agents struggle to afford local premises across boroughs, and so rely on signage to advertise both their properties and their businesses.
- ‘For Sale’ board are re-used, and estate agents we spoke to told us the existing ban meant they changed their advertising practices to more leaflet drops, a practice which not only uses a far higher amount of paper, energy, and plastic but sees thousands of tonnes of paper immediately thrown away.
- Councils have begun setting local design codes for shop frontages to ensure they are ‘in keeping with local character,’ yet despite having ‘Advertising Design Guidelines,’ Westminster Council has not proposed to extend that to ‘For Sale’ signs.
On revenue raising, the fee for advertising planning permissions can range between £235 and £648, and with the government proposing that councils set their own planning fees, one should not be surprised if councils use advertising of ‘For Sale’ signs to raise revenues as well as instil NIMBY sentiments.
This is certainly the case for ‘planning conditions’ on builds, which are meant to tackle certain local issues or requirements, such as acceptable brick colours or landscaping, Yet when planning applications already include that information, an individually chargeable planning condition will still be included, with any modifications to satisfy the changing winds often accruing a subsequent fee.
It is time to call out the local authority as NIMBY’s on this issue. They have not sought any ‘in character’ solution. Cite climate change as a concern, but their proposal will see increased energy use, more waste and reduced re-useable materials. Their whole premise will curtail local businesses by increasing all their costs, and consequently giving a leg up to big companies.
Westminster talk about tackling ‘fairness’ and the two-tier system, but the borough’s housing crisis paints a different picture. The average house price is £960,000. More than 4,000 people are on its council housing waiting list, with 23 families waiting over two decades. 2,204 people have been stuck in temporary accommodation for at least ten years.
Meanwhile, the council is sitting on more than £185million of unspent Section 106 funding, £129 million of which is allocated for affordable housing.
Test for the government
As Secretary of State for Housing, Communities, and Local Government, Rt Hon Angela Rayner Secretary would decide whether the ‘For Sale’ ban is extended, and to her credit, she has taken a firm stance on opposing localist abuse.
However, if the council’s proposal does land at her desk, it will be a litmus test of whether Labour is serious about growth because it understands the damaging nature of NIMBY decision making on the long tail of business. Or, whether its plan is to continue presenting itself as YIMBY champions by approving schemes which already met regulations but need a little help to overcome NIMBY hurdles.
Rico Wojtulewicz is Head of Planning and Market Insight at the NFB.
In related news:
Campaigners pledge to make England’s farmland more sustainable