Agenda item

This application relates to the telecommunications equipment at the Heworth Green former gasworks site. The application is to replace the existing mast and associated equipment on site, with a new, taller and relocated mast [Guildhall Ward]

Members considered an application to replace the existing mast and associated equipment on site, with a new, taller and relocated mast. The proposed mast would be some 60m northeast of the existing mast site, closer to housing at Heworth Mews.

The Development Manager outlined the application and this was followed by an update concerning  an additional representation in the form of an objection that had been made.

Following the presentation, members asked officers a number of questions to which they answered that:

·        The height of the mast will be 32m.

·        The compound for the mast was approximately 10m from the play area.

·        The trees along the Sustrans route were deciduous, there was no plan to remove them.

Public Speakers

David Holt spoke in opposition to the application.  His primary concern was the lack of screening for the proposed mast. He questioned why alternative locations had not been considered and raised concerns regarding the safety of the compound in relation to the nearby children’s playground. 

Responding to questions from members, he confirmed that the rear of his property would face the mast.

Tim Ross spoke in support of the application as the agent for the applicant.  He explained that the relocation of the mast was necessary in order to decontaminate the site and build 607 homes as part of the city plan. This would also reduce pressure on green field sites in the city.  He confirmed that the developers agreed to the proposed planning conditions included in the officer’s report. There are also planned planting schemes in place.

Mr Ross and Mike Phillips, the project manager, also clarified a number of points in response to members’ questions.

·        The mast has to be removed to decontaminate the site and the location of the new mast has been identified to enhance public views and meet the needs of the communications companies to deliver 5G.

·        The developers have met with Sustrans and have discussed planting options. Planting close to the mast must not be more than 15m in height.

Cllr Robert Webb spoke in objection to the application as Ward Councillor on behalf of local residents. He explained that at the time the outline planning consent was granted, the concerns regarding the mast and its’ location were already in existence.  It had been anticipated that the new mast would be slimmer and less obtrusive.  He also highlighted the lack of suitable screening for residents.  He requested a deferment to consider alternative options.

Following further questions from members, the reasons for the height and position of the mast was clarified.

After debate it was moved by Cllr Galvin and seconded by Cllr Orrell that the application be approved subject to the conditions in the report.  On being put to the vote, the motion was carried and it was:

Resolved:  That approval be given to the application subject to the conditions listed in the report.

Reasons:

                     i.        The NPPF and Publication Draft Local Plan policy C1 state that telecommunications should be supported where possible.  The NPPF states such infrastructure is essential for economic growth, and DLP policy C1 supports mast sharing and continued use of existing sites.  The taller mast enables 5G to be accommodated.   Further, it weighs in favour of the scheme that the relocation is to facilitate redevelopment of the site for new housing and the setting of the Minster, the views from the conservation area in East Parade would be enhanced.  No harm to Heritage Assets has been identified.

                    ii.        The visual impact on the local area is comparable to the existing mast, which is evident above existing tree cover.  The new mast would be some 2.6 m taller and of comparable lattice type design.  The mast would be closer to housing at Heworth Mews and 19 Hawthorn Grove than the existing mast, but the relocation moves it further from other housing along Hawthorn Grove. 

                  iii.        The mast would have an adverse impact on the amenity of surrounding residents in terms of outlook.  This is, and would be, the case with the existing and alternative locations on-site.  The equipment on the mast needs to be located at certain height.  It would be no less obtrusive on the townscape or in the outlook from surrounding houses if it were located on the proposed buildings on-site; it would need to be some 15m taller than the tallest buildings.  In any event the developers of the site and the mast operators have discounted this option, for example due to issues around maintenance access and as there would be compromise on the design and function of the proposed dwellings.

                  iv.        The visual impact of the proposed mast is mitigated by the separation distance from housing and prominence of tree cover.  Overall, the mast would not be significantly more intrusive than the current structure, to the extent that would justify a refusal on amenity grounds.

[The meeting adjourned from 19:24 to 19:34]