The Committee considered a report regarding an
application for prior notification 17/00278/TEL, the installation
of a 15m green monopole with 3 antennas and 1 microwave dish, 3
equipment cabinets and a meter cabinet within a fenced compound and
works ancillary thereto.
Ragbir Sahota, Planning Officer, reported on
updates to the report since it had been published. It had been confirmed that if the existing mast
was to be shared the height of the mast would have to be increased
to such an extent that it would be visually detrimental and
therefore the application for the second mast had been
submitted. The street furniture/fire
tower was also not appropriate to house any telecommunications
equipment and its height would make it visually more prominent.
In answer to a question he confirmed that a
similar application at a different site was refused by Committee on
the grounds of visual intrusion; however, the Council had lost on
appeal. He confirmed that this
application was less visually intrusive.
Councillor John Rowley stated that although he
understood the concerns of local residents, the site would be well
screened and the environmental impact would not be
Councillor Thompson expressed concern that an
additional mast so close to an existing mast was not ideal and it
would be more appropriate to consider modifying the existing
mast. However, if an additional mast
was required additional screening to reduce the visual impact
should be considered.
Councillor Miles expressed concern that this
application had generated considerable public interest; however,
due to the tight deadline, the Committee had to make a decision
today and it was requested that timescales were reviewed.
Stephen Alexander, Head of Planning confirmed
that if the existing mast was modified it would be considerably
higher and visually intrusive. The
additional mast would be more acceptable in terms of visual
amenity. He also confirmed that if this
was refused it was probable that the Council would lose on
Lisa Delrio, Senior Solicitor confirmed that
under the Council’s Constitution applications were decided by
delegated authority. This application
had come before the Committee due to the large number of objections
from local residents.
That prior approval be granted.