Agenda item

To consider the report of the Director.

The Assistant Service Lead City Development presented the application for prior approval for the installation of 18 metre high 5G telecommunication monopole with cabinet at base and associated ancillary works.

The Assistant Service Lead City Development:-

·         detailed the location of the mast and the associated equipment explaining that the height of the mast had been reduced from 20 metres and its location moved slightly to avoid a gas main;

·         referred to a map showing the cell search of the area detailing areas covered by 5G and areas where coverage was poor or with little or no coverage;

·         referred to other site options considered by the applicant and the reasons for their rejection such as conflicts with transmission with other masts and a preference for using public land; and

·         referred to a series of photo montages provided by the applicant, which showed a range of views and the potential visual impact the mast would have on the street scene.

He advised that a total of 183 representations had been received with 178 objecting. Responding to new issues raised he advised that:-

·         a potential site option to the north of Exeter Arms was not considered suitable because of an existing mast used by a different operator which would have resulted in interference;

·         the height of a typical double decker bus was 4.5 metres which was lower than the 18 metre height of the mast and therefore the difference between passengers and height of mast was significantly in excess of Government guidelines; and

·         the visuals submitted were in respect of a 20 metre mast but were considered acceptable as it was possible to gauge the impact of a 18 metre mast.

The Assistant Service Lead City Development advised that grounds for approval of the prior approval were limited to size, shape and appearance and it was not considered that there were reasons for refusal on these grounds.

He responded as follows to Members queries:-

·         St Peters School, which was 200 metres from the application site, had been consulted, the school making representations in July 2020, seeking assurance that the mast complied with Government guidance. No further representation had been received from the school;

·         the mast and associated equipment were on the back edge of the pavement with a gap of 3.475 metres between the cabinet and kerb. The Highway Authority had confirmed that the pavement was sufficiently wide and the equipment did not impede use by pedestrians and cyclists;

·         no objections had been received from the Devon and Cornwall Constabulary;

·         issues relating to Biodiversity, including the reference to wildlife whiskered bats, accorded with Government guidance and there was no evidence that there would be an adverse impact on wildlife; and

·         the submission of a statutory nuisance was not part of the planning system.

Ms Tere Wells spoke against the application. She raised the following points:-

·         Sidmouth Road is a major link between Exeter and the East of Exeter with the mature trees being a crucial aesthetic creating an image of a "Green City";

·         a Devon Wildlife Trust Survey of 2018 states that there are "Whiskered Bats " at Middlemoor, a protected species in the UK and Europe; 

·         5G will not pass through wet foliage, trees are being felled nationwide to allow this new technology and any damage to the tree lined road would alter the appearance of the locality;

·         this 18 metre pole will be visible from some distance and will be in direct line of sight for local residents, businesses, approach roads and loom high above bus stops;

·         there is a proliferation of masts in this area;

·         it is sited close to a school with 2,000 pupils, which had little time to research and inform parents;

·         no evidence to show that local businesses have been consulted;

·         no exclusion zone information has been provided regarding the close proximity of the School, local businesses and residential properties;

·         the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection certificate is out of date, unsigned, incomplete;

·         emissions may constitute a Statutory Nuisance caused by toxic pollutants and a Statutory Nuisance Complaint has been lodged with Environmental Health by residents to investigate whether polluting effects are permissible;

·         a precautionary approach to the siting of masts is necessary on public health grounds; and

·         application should be rejected on siting, appearance and the incomplete, invalid information provided with this application.

The Chair referred to the following:-

·         under national planning regulations the Council can only consider siting and appearance and mobile operators are not required to justify need;

·         the Council cannot consider perception of health risk associated with new telecoms, or the precautionary principal. The considerations to be taken into account in the determination of Prior Approval applications are prescribed and are very limited under planning regulations;

·         the application has to be determined within 56 days of receipt or a date agreed with the applicant. The operator has the right to install the apparatus if there is no response within this timescale; and

·         the Council has no control over what applications are submitted, nor can it withdraw the application. Only the applicant can withdraw the application. If the Council refuses to determine the application within the 56 days (or an agreed date) and planning permission can still be granted.

Members expressed the following views:-

·         oppose location of the site and the mast will have an adverse impact on residential area and local residents;

·         site is close to the school building itself as well as the corner of the playing field and concern that the school has not come back with further issues;

·         mast is likely to have an adverse impact on the neighbouring public service operators given the proximity of the Police Headquarters and the Fire Station, radio etc. signals from which are likely to be disrupted;

·         the application should be deferred to assess the statutory nuisance complaint lodged with the Council;

·         further information is required on the cumulative impact of masts in the area;

·         St. Peters School and the Police have engaged with the consultation process, the school being 200 metres away. Neither objected;

·         site is in an acceptable location on the outskirts of the city and not sufficiently close to residential areas; and

·         masts are required to meet coverage for mobile phones use of which is widespread.

The recommendation was for approval subject to the condition set out in the report.

The recommendation was moved and seconded.

RESOLVED that, subject to receipt and consideration of outstanding consultation responses and any representations received, prior approval is granted for the installation of 18m high 5G telecommunication monopole with cabinet at base and associated ancillary works, subject to no development shall take place, including any works of demolition, until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The statement should include details of access arrangements and timings and management of arrivals and departures of vehicles. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and public amenity

The meeting was adjourned at 19:20 and re-convened at 19:25.