Loading document...
{{table:160208}} - An equipment cabin is proposed measuring 2m in length, 2m wide and 2.4m high. The proposed equipment cabinets will be colour coated green. ### Relevant Planning History - None ### Development Plan Policies - The Laxey and Lonan Area Plan Order 2005. - Isle of Man Strategic Plan (Modified Draft) (November 2004) ### Issues - Under the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2005 permission is granted for the erection of masts under 15 metres high for telecommunication purposes. - Telecommunication companies who wish to exercise this development right have to inform the planning authority via a prior notification procedure. - This notification then gives the planning authority 28 days to consider the siting and design of the proposed installation. - Within the 28 day time period the planning authority have to either conclude that prior approval to the siting and design is required and that the details submitted are either acceptable (approval) or not acceptable (refusal) - This notification was submitted on 1/2/07 and therefore, the applicant must have received the decision on 28th February 2007, otherwise the proposal would benefit from deemed consent and could be implemented immediately. - A telecommunications prior notification limits the planning authority's consideration of the proposals to the siting and design of the proposed installation. - Policy L/TRT/PR/5 – Railways and Tramways states that "No development will be permitted where this would have an adverse impact on the appearance, character, setting or amenities of any railway building, facility or along the track where any view from the Manx Electric, Groudle or Snaefell Mountain Railways would be adversely affected. - In respect of the impact on the Manx Electric Railway (MER), the application site is adjacent the railway just before the Baldrine Halt. The application site is within the grounds of the Methodist Hall. The site is separated by a 1.5m panel fencing. There is no soft landscaping along the boundary of the Methodist Hall grounds with the MER. The existing building is highly visible along with the existing telegraph pole, which is to the front of the Methodist Hall. The proposed mast and equipment cabin will be set approximately 0.8m above the ground level of the Hall. The mast will project 4.4m above the roof apex of the Methodist Hall. The equipment cabin will project 1m above the boundary fence, which bounds the MER. The proposal does not respect the appearance, character and setting of the MER. I consider this proposal is highly inappropriate. The introduction of an additional vertical element will appear incongruous by reason of its siting, height and visual appearance when viewed from the MER. - There is public footpath set approximately 10m to the North West of the application. The landscape between the application and the public footpath is open in character. The mast will be visible and would appear has an alien feature within the locality. - In respect of the impact on the A2 and the Baldrine Road, the proposed mast is set back from the public highway behind the Methodist Hall. However, as mentioned above the mast is slightly elevated above ground level and projecting well above the height of the roof apex. The mast will be very dominant due to its height when viewed from the public highway from the A2 and to some degree from the Baldrine Road. The proposed mast would appear out of scale with the surrounding locality. Any argument about its similarity to the telegraph pole is not a justifiable reason for allowing the mast. The telegraph pole is tolerated as it already exists as it is essential in the service of public utilities. I consider the introduction of a substantial mast in this prominent location would result in a conspicuous and incongruous development out of keeping and scale with the surrounding locality. - The monopole will be partially obscured when viewed from south of the application site along the A2. Due to the existing landscaping, the mast will have very little impact on the visual amenities of the locality when viewed from this direction. - Furthermore, the application indicates that the mast will provide coverage for Baldrine. However, the application does not contain any existing or proposed coverage plots to justify the need of a mast in this location. I therefore consider the applicant has failed to demonstrate the need for a mast at this location. - The nearest residential property set 8m to the north east of the application site does not directly overlook the proposed mast. I therefore consider the proposed mast will not reduce the residential amenity of the occupiers of the property. - In terms of the comments on the health issues of a telecommunication mast, the Isle of Man has no specific guidelines in how to deal with such concerns. However, the UK Government has produced such advice in Planning Policy Guidance Note 8 – Telecommunications (PPG8). PPG8 expressly advises that where a proposed telecommunications installation conforms to the recommendation of The Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones (The Stewart Report) and the Guidelines for the public exposure set by The International Commission On Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) then the local planning authority should have no concerns with regard to health and safety issues. - The application is accompanied by a certificate of compliance with the World Health Organisation ICNIRP guidelines for public exposure. - The Health and Safety Inspectorate is responsible for the monitoring of telecommunications installations to ensure compliance with the ICNIRP Guidelines. ### Conclusion I therefore conclude that there are sustainable grounds to oppose this proposal and can therefore only recommend that prior approval to the siting and appearance of the development is required and that the details should be refused. ### Recommendation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 22.02.2007
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
R 1.
The prior notification proposes the installation of a substantial telecommunications mast with associated development in a prominent location and would result in a conspicuous and incongruous development out of keeping and scale with the surrounding area. More specifically the proposal:-
Furthermore, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that there are no technically feasible less harmful alternative to the scheme proposed.
Decision Made : ... Committee Meeting Date : ...
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
