Grass Verge on Eastern Side of Attoxhall Road, Coventry, CV2 5BF
Coventry City Council — appeal dismissed
- Outcome
- Dismissed
- Decision date
- 15 October 2024
- Authority
- Coventry City Council
- Inspector
- Cooper P
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Casework type
- Planning Appeal
- Type detail
- Planning Appeals - Full
- Development type
- Other minor developments
- Appellant
- MBNL, EE Ltd and H3G UK Ltd
- LPA reference
- PL/2024/0000167/PAEC
- ONS LPA code
- E08000026
- Jurisdiction
- Transferred
- Link status
- Not Linked
- Start date
- 23 July 2024
Summary AI
The appeal for a 20m monopole to support 5G connectivity was dismissed due to its harmful impact on the character and appearance of the area, despite the economic and social benefits. The inspector found that the mast's design and scale would be incongruous in a residential setting, and its visibility would be unattractive.
PDF text
Grass Verge on Eastern Side of Attoxhall Road, Coventry, CV2 5BF — Coventry City Council — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 1 October 2024 by Paul Cooper MSc MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 15th October 2024 Appeal Ref: APP/U4610/W/24/3346365 Grass Verge on Eastern Side of Attoxhall Road, Coventry CV2 5BF • 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 MBNL (EE (UK) Ltd & H3G (UK) Ltd) against the decision of Coventry City Council. • The application Ref PL/2024/0000167/PAEC, dated 24 January 2024, was refused by notice dated 16 February 2024. • The development proposed is Prior approval for slimline 20m monopole, antenna apertures, dishes, cabinets and 6no. associated ancillary equipment cabinets. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. The provisions of the Order 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, taking into account any representations received.
Grass Verge on Eastern Side of Attoxhall Road, Coventry, CV2 5BF — Coventry City Council — Appeal Decision My determination of this appeal has been made on the same basis. 3. The principle of development is established by the Order, and the provisions therein do not require regard be had to the development plan. I have had regard to the policies of the development plan, any related guidance and the National Planning Policy Framework (Framework) only in so far as they are a material consideration relevant to matters of siting and appearance. Main Issue 4. The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area. Reasons 5. The proposed development would be located in close proximity to the public footpath and the highway, in a predominately residential area. The mast would be located immediately adjacent a bus stop, and opposite another stop on Attoxhall Road. The area includes a good degree of vertical landscaping in the form of trees. There are also streetlights and some signage in the locality. 6. The Framework states that such telecommunications development is essential, and the expansion of electronic networks should be supported, including the https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate
Grass Verge on Eastern Side of Attoxhall Road, Coventry, CV2 5BF — Coventry City Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/U4610/W/24/3346365 next generation of mobile phone technology. Based on the guidance in the Framework, there would be public benefits from the proposal. 7. The Framework states that evidence must be supplied to demonstrate that alternatives have been taken into consideration. I am satisfied, based on the evidence before me, that a sufficiently robust investigation as to possible alternatives has taken place. 8. In this case, the appellant’s evidence demonstrates that there is a need for a new mast in the area, as there is an an existing site location nearby on the roof of William Malcolm House, which is to be demolished and the appellant has been served with a “Notice To Quit” which means the operator has to remove their existing equipment. 9. The appellants state that the proposed mast would maintain the level of Fifth Generation (5G) connectivity for the area due to the removal of the existing mast. The proposed mast would be easily visible and tower above the existing surroundings when seen in its context.
Grass Verge on Eastern Side of Attoxhall Road, Coventry, CV2 5BF — Coventry City Council — Appeal Decision Although it could be argued that the mast is a slim, unfussy design, it would be considerably taller than any of the nearby street furniture and trees, whilst its utilitarian appearance would not fit well into this residential environment. 10. The scale of the mast is strident, industrial in nature and has the external appearance of a structure more often seen in industrial areas and would be harmful to the local context of residential development. The mast would appear dominant in the locality and be harmful to the character and appearance of the area, magnified by its proximity to the footpath and Attoxhall Road. 11. From closer viewpoints, the entire structure would be visible. It would be an unattractive and dominating feature. The scale and design of the installation would be incongruous in this setting. Consequently, regardless of the colour finish that could be used on the equipment, I conclude that the siting and appearance of the proposal would significantly harm the street scene and the character and appearance of the area. 12.
Grass Verge on Eastern Side of Attoxhall Road, Coventry, CV2 5BF — Coventry City Council — Appeal Decision The Framework recognises that planning decisions should support the expansion of electronic communications networks and the appellant has provided evidence to justify the proposed development. However, I have found the siting and appearance of the development would result in harm to the character and appearance of the area, which is not outweighed by these other considerations. I find the proposal to be in conflict with the design and setting aspirations as set out in the Framework. Other Matters 13. I have noted the supporting decisions that the appellant has added to their statement in relation to the merits of the scheme. I do not have full details of these locations, but it is highly unlikely that the context of these locations would be the same, and in any event, the proposal should be assessed upon its own merits. Conclusion 14. I have taken into account the economic and social benefits of the proposal, and the supporting documentation provided that demonstrate the merits of an effective communications network. Nonetheless, I do not find these benefits https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2
Grass Verge on Eastern Side of Attoxhall Road, Coventry, CV2 5BF — Coventry City Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/U4610/W/24/3346365 outweigh the harm that would be generated by the siting of the mast and associated works in such a location. 15. For the reasons set out, I conclude the appeal should be dismissed.
Grass Verge on Eastern Side of Attoxhall Road, Coventry, CV2 5BF — Coventry City Council — Paul Cooper INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3
Main issues and findings
Character and appearance Against appellant ¶11
The scale and design of the installation would be incongruous in this setting, and would result in harm to the character and appearance of the area.
Character and appearance Against appellant ¶10
The scale of the mast is strident, industrial in nature and has the external appearance of a structure more often seen in industrial areas.
Planning obligations Neutral
The Framework recognises that planning decisions should support the expansion of electronic communications networks, but the inspector found that the siting and appearance of the development would result in harm to the character and appearance of the area, which is not outweighed by these other considerations.
Policies relied on
| Reference | Weight |
|---|---|
| NPPF 208 |
Moderate |
Site constraints from the Casework Database
Source
Decision letter, 3 pages, issued by the Planning Inspectorate on 15 October 2024 under the Open Government Licence.