Western Way Streetworks, Western Way, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG22 6ER

Western Way Streetworks, Western Way, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG22 6ER — Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 25 April 2022 by Robert Parker BSc (Hons) Dip TP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 20 May 2022 Appeal Ref: APP/H1705/W/21/3283055 BND10904 - Western Way Streetworks, Western Way, Basingstoke RG22 6ER • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant approval required under Schedule 2, Part 16, Class A of The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015, as amended. • The appeal is made by CK Hutchinson Networks (UK) Ltd against the decision of Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council. • The application Ref 21/01264/TENO, dated 9 April 2021, was refused by notice dated 3 June 2021. • The development proposed is the installation of a 15 metre high monopole supporting 6 no. antennas and 2 no. transmission dishes, 4 no. equipment cabinets and development works ancillary thereto. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2.

Western Way Streetworks, Western Way, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG22 6ER — Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council — Appeal Decision The above Order permits the installation of the proposed monopole and radio equipment housing, subject to the condition that, before beginning the development, the developer must apply to the local planning authority for a determination as to whether the prior approval of the authority will be required as to the siting and appearance of the development. The decision notice does not explicitly state that prior approval is required but this is implicit in the Council’s decision to refuse prior approval. 3. The decision notice makes reference to Policy EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029. I have taken account of this policy insofar as it is relevant to judgements concerning the siting and appearance of the proposed development. However, since there is no statutory requirement to determine applications for prior approval in accordance with the development plan, the primary basis for my assessment is the Order itself. Main Issue 4. The main issue is the effect of the siting and appearance of the proposed installation on the street scene of Western Way and whether any identified harm is outweighed by the need for the installation to be sited as proposed taking into account any suitable alternatives.

Western Way Streetworks, Western Way, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG22 6ER — Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council — Appeal Decision Reasons 5. The proposed monopole would be located on a highway verge to the front of St Andrew’s Methodist Church. Grass verges and the street trees on them are https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Western Way Streetworks, Western Way, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG22 6ER — Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council — Appeal Decision Reasons 5. The proposed monopole would be located on a highway verge to the front of St Andrew’s Methodist Church. Grass verges and the street trees on them are https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Western Way Streetworks, Western Way, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG22 6ER — Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/H1705/W/21/3283055 important features of Western Way, contributing positively to the character and appearance of the area. The dwellings in Western Way are two-storey and they have been set back from the road to create a spacious, tree-lined avenue. At 8 metres to the ridge, St Andrew’s Church is comparable in height to the housing which surrounds it, and its siting follows much the same building line. 6. The monopole would be a sizeable structure, both in height and diameter, and at 15 metres in height it would be substantially taller than nearby buildings. The height and thickness would make the monopole dominant in comparison with nearby street lighting columns which are shorter and more slender. Although the ancillary equipment cabinets would be individually modest, they would combine to create ugly visual clutter on the grass verge. The position of the development forward of the buildings would make it unduly prominent and intrusive in views along Western Way. 7. There are various items of street furniture in the locality, including the aforementioned street lighting columns, a bus shelter and a pedestrian crossing.

Western Way Streetworks, Western Way, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG22 6ER — Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council — Appeal Decision These sit comfortably in public views and they do not draw the eye in the same way that the proposed monopole and multiple equipment cabinets would. The presence of existing street furniture and trees would not adequately mitigate the adverse visual impacts or otherwise justify the appeal scheme. 8. The National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) supports the expansion of electronic communications networks, including next generation technology such as 5G. The benefits of mobile telecommunications to the economy and social well-being are not contested and the Council does not dispute that there is a need to improve network coverage in this part of Basingstoke. It is not easy for operators to find suitable sites in residential areas, due to the nature of the built form and the constraints of 5G technology. Nevertheless, an appropriate balance needs to be struck between the network requirements and visual amenity. 9. Paragraph 115 of the Framework states that where new sites are required, equipment should be sympathetically designed and camouflaged where appropriate. In my judgement, the proposal does not meet these aims of government policy.

Western Way Streetworks, Western Way, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG22 6ER — Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council — Appeal Decision The development would be at odds with the domestic scale of surrounding buildings and it would be materially harmful to the spacious character of Western Way. 10. I have taken account of the evidence presented on possible alternative sites for the development. The information is limited, particularly that relating to the discounting of the grassed area adjacent the car park on St Andrew’s Road. This does not constitute robust evidence to demonstrate an overriding need for the appeal site to be used. Even if it did, the visual harm arising from the proposal is significant. Notwithstanding the importance placed by the Government on mobile telecommunications, the public benefits arising from new 5G and improved 4G coverage would not outweigh the harm. Conclusion 11. For the reasons given above, I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.

Western Way Streetworks, Western Way, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG22 6ER — Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council — Robert Parker INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2