Area of Footpath, Home Farm Close, Leicester, Leicestershire, LE4 0SU

Area of Footpath, Home Farm Close, Leicester, Leicestershire, LE4 0SU — Leicester City Council — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 25 May 2023 by M Aqbal BA (Hons) DipTP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 04 July 2023 Appeal Ref: APP/W2465/W/22/3298299 Area of footpath, Home Farm Close, Leicester LE4 0SU • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant approval required under Article 3(1) and Schedule 2, Part 16, Class A of The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) (‘GPDO’). • The appeal is made by CK Hutchison Networks (UK) Ltd against the decision of Leicester City Council. • The application Ref 20212582, dated 13 October 2021, was refused by notice dated 7 December 2021. • The development proposed is Street Pole with Built-In Cabinet, 3no. Separate Cabinets and Ancillary Works. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Main Issue 2. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area, including designated heritage assets; and, in the event that any harm is identified, whether that harm would be outweighed by the need to site the installation in the location proposed and any benefits associated with the proposal. Preliminary Matters 3.

Area of Footpath, Home Farm Close, Leicester, Leicestershire, LE4 0SU — Leicester City Council — Appeal Decision The provisions of the GPDO, under Article 3(1) and Schedule 2, Part 16, Class A, Paragraph A.3(4) require the local planning authority to assess the proposed development solely on the basis of its siting and appearance. My determination of this appeal has been made on the same basis. Also, I have only had regard to the development plan and the National Planning Policy Framework (‘the Framework’) insofar as they are material to matters of siting and appearance. Reasons 4. The appeal site is a wide pavement area forward of the service area for the supermarket at 1 Old Barn Walk. Home Farm Close, together with Home Farm Court/Old Barn Walk/Home Farm Square comprise a modest precinct with a number of community and retail facilities. 5. About 50m to the northwest of the site, rear of the supermarket, is Home Farm (The Mallard Public House) which is grade II listed. Whilst views are available from the vicinity of the appeal site towards this building, this is largely screened by the supermarket and therefore the effects of the proposal on this property would not be sufficient to cause harm. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Area of Footpath, Home Farm Close, Leicester, Leicestershire, LE4 0SU — Leicester City Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/W2465/W/22/3298299 6. However, much closer and to the east of the appeal site is Beaumont Leys House (Home Farm Neighbourhood Centre) which is grade II listed. The significance of this listed building draws from its architectural interest, as well as historic interest. Also, opposite this listed building is a landscaped area of public open space, which complements this listed building and wider area. 7. The setting of Beaumont Leys House (Home Farm Neighbourhood Centre) extends in all directions around it. In particular, views are available from the appeal site towards this listed building and from the listed building towards the appeal site. Furthermore, the appeal site forms part of the pedestrian route which provides access to this listed building and the nearby public open space. 8. Even though the immediate backdrop to the appeal site is the servicing area for the supermarket, this area is largely free of any significant development and bound by a low wall and railings. As such, this largely open area gives prominence to the Beaumont Leys House (Home Farm Neighbourhood Centre), which is also prominent in views from the appeal site. 9.

Area of Footpath, Home Farm Close, Leicester, Leicestershire, LE4 0SU — Leicester City Council — Appeal Decision The nearby area does incorporate some modest elements of street furniture including signage. These are in the form of totem poles with a limited height. There are also other vertical structures such as lamp posts and telegraph poles which are slender in form. Therefore, these are not visually obtrusive and are settled within the street scene. 10. The proposal is intended to improve digital wireless, mobile coverage within this area with new equipment to facilitate part of an integral requirement to expand Fifth Generation (5G) coverage in and around Home Farm Close, to the northwest of the city centre. This would comprise a 18m monopole incorporating a wrap-around cabinet at its base, along with further separate cabinets adjacent to this. These are to be sited along the pavement close to low wall and railings associated with the supermarket. 11. In the abovementioned context, the proposed 18m monopole because of its height, would be significantly taller than the adjacent supermarket building and taller than the other buildings in the area. 12.

Area of Footpath, Home Farm Close, Leicester, Leicestershire, LE4 0SU — Leicester City Council — Appeal Decision Moreover, despite its functional appearance, the monopole because of its height would not visually integrate with the nearby street lighting and telegraph poles due to its appreciably greater height and column width, and more bulky and visibly distinct headframe design in relation to the supporting column. Thereby, appearing unduly stark and visually prominent. 13. Whilst there are established trees nearby and the equipment would be finished in Green (RAL-6009), I am not persuaded that the visual impact arising from the design, height and siting of the structure could be mitigated by the use of a particular colour finish or sufficiently screened by the existing trees. 14. The position of the monopole and cabinets in proximity of the roadside, would further contribute to the visual dominance of the proposal as perceived by passing drivers and pedestrians. 15. In light of the above reasons, the proposal would introduce an incongruous feature within the street scene.

Area of Footpath, Home Farm Close, Leicester, Leicestershire, LE4 0SU — Leicester City Council — Appeal Decision Most notably, whilst the appellant has sought to site the proposed development away from the main outlook of the nearby listed buildings, this would still be highly prominent and dominant in views towards and from the Beaumont Leys House (Home Farm Neighbourhood https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Area of Footpath, Home Farm Close, Leicester, Leicestershire, LE4 0SU — Leicester City Council — Appeal Decision Most notably, whilst the appellant has sought to site the proposed development away from the main outlook of the nearby listed buildings, this would still be highly prominent and dominant in views towards and from the Beaumont Leys House (Home Farm Neighbourhood https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Area of Footpath, Home Farm Close, Leicester, Leicestershire, LE4 0SU — Leicester City Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/W2465/W/22/3298299 Centre). Therefore, because of its siting and appearance, the proposed development would interrupt and distract from the architecture of this building, when experienced from its surroundings. In particular, in views from Home Farm Close. Thereby, harming the setting of this listed building. 16. The harm that would occur to the setting of the listed building would not be severe and therefore it would be ‘less than substantial’ within the meaning of the Framework. This is a matter of considerable importance and weight. Paragraph 202 of the Framework nevertheless requires such harm to be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal. I shall undertake this balance later in my Decision. 17. Nonetheless, for the above reasons, the proposal due to its siting and appearance, would harm character and appearance of the area, including the setting of a designated heritage asset. The proposal is therefore contrary to CS Policy 03 and CS Policy 18 of the Council’s Core Strategy adopted July 2014, insofar as these are material to this application for prior approval. Other considerations 18.

Area of Footpath, Home Farm Close, Leicester, Leicestershire, LE4 0SU — Leicester City Council — Appeal Decision Support for the delivery of advanced, high quality and reliable communications networks is afforded by the Framework, other government documents as set out in the appellant’s submissions and the development plan, and such networks bring significant social and economic benefits. Furthermore, the proposal would support new 5G coverage to a predominantly residential area. 19. Paragraph 117(c) of the Framework outlines that for a new mast or base station, evidence that the applicant has explored the possibility of erecting antennas on an existing building, mast or other structure should be submitted. 20. The sequential approach to site selection includes: 1. Upgrading an operator’s own existing base station(s); 2. Using existing telecommunications structures belonging to another code system operator, i.e., mast sharing; 3. Co-location or site sharing alongside existing telecommunications development; 4. Installing a base station on an existing building or tall structure. If 1-4 are unavailable, the only viable option is the erection of a new ground-based mast. In this case, the appellant has shown that the new ground-based mast is the only option.

Area of Footpath, Home Farm Close, Leicester, Leicestershire, LE4 0SU — Leicester City Council — Appeal Decision The appellant has also advised that owing to the predominantly residential nature of the area and its low-rise housing, opportunities to deploy a new telecommunications installation are very limited. 21. The appellant has also referred me to three separate appeal decisions which relate to proposals for free-standing poles with associated ground-based cabinets. However, I have insufficient details in respect of these to draw any meaningful conclusions and comparison to the appeal scheme. 22. The fact that the proposal would meet the International Commission on Non- Ionizing Radiation Protection guidelines for public exposure is a requirement of prior approval. Therefore, this and the fact that the proposed development has been located to minimise impact to pedestrians using the highway and there are no known objections from highways in respect of the proposed scheme do not alter my findings on the main issue. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

Area of Footpath, Home Farm Close, Leicester, Leicestershire, LE4 0SU — Leicester City Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/W2465/W/22/3298299 Planning balance and conclusion 23. In terms of the paragraph 202 of the Framework, despite finding the harm to be less than substantial, having regard to the Framework1 I still attach significant weight to this. Such harm can be outweighed by public benefits. However, the public benefits in this instance do not outweigh the less than substantial harm that I have identified. 24. Turning to the overall balance, I have taken account of the potential economic and social benefits of the proposal detailed by the appellants, and the support given elsewhere and by the Framework for high quality and reliable communications infrastructure, including 5G networks, in supporting economic growth and social well-being. 25. However, in this case, for the reasons given above, I do not consider that the public benefits of the installation in terms of the enhancement of the telecommunications network, its contribution to economic growth and the locational needs outweigh the significant harm that I have found arising from the proposal due to its siting and appearance. I, therefore, conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.

Area of Footpath, Home Farm Close, Leicester, Leicestershire, LE4 0SU — Leicester City Council — M Aqbal INSPECTOR 1 Paragraph 199 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4