Siting of 21m high telecommunications mast including a radio station, 3 antennas, 2 equipment cabinets, ancillary equipment together with a 1.8m high security fence.
LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Judith M Humphreys
Link to relevant background documents
Minutes:
Erect a 21m high telecommunications mast, including
a radio station, 3 antennae, 2 equipment cabinets, associated equipment,
together with a 1.8m high security fence.
(a) The
Planning Manager elaborated on the background of the application, noting that this
application was deferred at
the Committee meeting on 4 September 2017. It was noted that the site was located on the outskirts of Penygroes at
the rear of the telephone exchange site which
contained one permanent single-storey building.
Attention was drawn to the additional observations
that had been received.
It
was noted that the general requirements of Policy PS3 of the JLDP permitted
infrastructure proposals that sought to extend or improve connections via
existing communication technologies and those being developed.
It was explained
that Planning Policy Wales stated clearly in relation
to the implications of such
development proposals on health, that
the Welsh Government was of the opinion
that local planning authorities should not further consider any health
impacts or the concerns about them when
processing an application for planning permission or approval beforehand if the development satisfied the requirements of the
International Commission on
Non-Ionizing Protection
(ICNIRP) Public Exposure Guidelines. Information had been received from
the applicant indicating compliance with these standards.
It was noted
that with this type of development
it was inevitable that the proposed main structure would be partly visible from public
places as it needed to be in a fairly open
location to ensure that it operated to its full capacity.
It
was considered that the development was unlikely to have any obvious long term
impact on the visual amenities of the local area. It was reported that a late
objection had been received regarding the impact of the development on the
ancient monument of Caer Engan,
CADW had been consulted and confirmation was received that they had no
objection to the proposal.
The development
was acceptable in terms of relevant local and national
policies for the reasons noted in
the report.
(b) The following main points were made by a member who was acting as
a local member (not a member of this Planning Committee):-
·
That the local
community was concerned about the negative impact of the development and were anxious
for it to be re-located;
·
In accordance with the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act
2015, there was a duty to take stock and
ensure short and long term needs;
·
Reference was made
to international studies and appeals which
showed the impact of electronic magnetic radiation on health.
Recognised that health matters were not a consideration in determining the application;
·
Concern regarding
the visual impact and the impact on the business of Pant Du that was an attraction
for local people and visitors
alike;
·
Concern that
a new prominent industrial mast would have an impact
on the application for World Heritage
Site Status for the Slate Industry (UNESCO);
·
That Grŵp Cynefin had a scheme to develop housing near the site and they
opposed the proposal. Approving the application could prevent the scheme;
·
In accordance with the Ffordd Gwynedd culture,
the comments of residents should be listened to and the application in this location
should be refused.
(c) In response to the above observations, the Senior Solicitor noted that he appreciated
the member's comment that the Committee in the context of planning were tied
in terms of health matters. He took the opportunity to draw the attention of members to a judicial review that had recently been before the High Court regarding
challenges relating to a
mast in the south of the County and the impact on health.
He noted that the Council had successfully defended the challenge. He also noted, that
there was no evidence before them for refusal
on the grounds of health and that
information had been submitted with the application showing that it satisfied statutory requirements. It was explained that if the application was refused on the grounds of health, that it was likely that the application would be referred to a cooling-off period.
(ch) It was
proposed to refuse the application contrary to the officers' recommendation as
the size and design of the mast at this location would be industrial in nature
and would have a significant negative impact on the area's visual
amenities.
The proposal was seconded.
During
the ensuing discussion, the
following main observations
were noted by members:
·
Concern regarding the visual impact and the impact
on the business at Pant Du. The application should be refused on the grounds of
economic matters as well;
·
That the location was unsuitable and there were
more suitable sites available;
·
Recognised that there was a need for a 4G signal
but there was concern regarding the size and appearance of the development and
its impact on nearby buildings. There
were other locations that could satisfy the requirements;
·
That it was an alien development that would be
intrusive on a semi rural site;
·
Concern that the proposal would have an impact on
the image of the village and its impact on local business;
·
That the land near the application site had been
earmarked for housing development in the JLDP and approving the application
would be a barrier to housing development;
·
Owners had invested in their houses near the site
and the development would affect their value;
·
That connectivity was important for people who
wanted to work from home and therefore the application had to be weighed-up.
The applicant had looked at other locations but they did not allow for
sufficient treatment.
(d) In
response to the above observations, the officers noted:
·
That the application should not be refused on the grounds of economic matters as these could not be justified. The requirement to consider the need for the provision
and the economic benefit that would
emanate from the proposal as it would supply a 4G signal;
·
The impact on property
value was not a planning consideration;
·
Regarding the adjacent site allocated
for housing, the designation could not be considered to refuse this application;
·
Consideration could be given
to the visual impact of the
structure from any premises.
RESOLVED to refuse the
application.
Reason:
The size and design of the mast in this location would be industrial in nature and would have a significant negative impact on the area's visual amenities.
Supporting documents: