Planning Applications - Runnymede Borough Council

More documents

Recommendations

Info

with associated equipment cabinets and compound for a temporary period of 2 years. 5.2 The main considerations for this application would be the impact on the openness of the Green Belt in terms of its siting and appearance. Consideration also needs to be given to the impact of the proposal on the residential properties to the north of the site and the setting of the Grade II Listed Buildings. 5.3 Paragraph 65 of Planning Policy Guidance Note 8: Telecommunications (August 2001) states that in Green Belts telecommunication developments are likely to be inappropriate unless they maintain openness. Inappropriate development may proceed only if very special circumstances are demonstrated which outweigh the degree of harm to the Green Belt. The lack of a suitable alternative site that would meet the needs of network coverage or capacity might be considered as very special circumstances. 5.4 The applicant is currently negotiating a site share arrangement at Chertsey sewage treatment site. This site share will not be in place by this summer when the Public Safety Radio Communication Project starts. This site is a temporary arrangement only. The applicant states that the two masts in the immediate vicinity are not tall enough or strong enough for mast sharing. Both masts would need to be demolished and replaced which is not a practical solution for a temporary arrangement. The applicant also states that the antennas used by cellular and Airwave masts are different and it is not technically possible to mount the antennas at the same level on the same structure. 5.5 Surrey Police state that radio communication is essential for effective policing. The current radio systems are entirely unsuitable for the modern environment. Two different systems, one for contact with vehicle mounted sets and one for handheld sets are in use. Both types are elderly and both use technology that is nearly obsolete. Currently radio coverage for the emergency services is patchy, signal quality is frequently poor and it is easy to monitor transmissions. Airwave is a digital, encrypted system that will provide hugely improved transmission quality, greater reliability and protection from eavesdropping. It can also allow private calls between officers as well as enhanced facilities for dealing with incidents (there are opportunities to effect common radio communication between the different emergency services which is currently almost impossible). 5.6 Surrey Police state that this is not a commercial ‘phone operation but is a service on which operational policing depends. 5.7 The mast would be located adjacent to Lyne Lane and the M25 and M3 junction. The carriageway is 6-7 metres higher than the field in which the communication tower would be sited. Viewed from any angle the tower would have a backdrop of trees, although it would be higher. Given the proposed location there is also the infrastructure associated with the Motorways including signage, bridges, street lamps, telegraph poles and the two additional masts in the locality. Consequently it will not be seen as too much of an isolated or prominent structure. It is considered that a
combination of the location, the temporary nature of the mast and its importance to the Police service constitute a very special circumstance for allowing inappropriate development in the Green Belt. 5.8 As Redlands Farm, Redlands Farm Barn and The Church of Holy Trinity are listed buildings in the locality. Special regard must be given to the setting of these listed buildings. Given the substantial distance between the proposed site and these buildings it is unlikely that proposed communication tower would be detrimental to the setting of these listed buildings. 5.9 The nearest residential properties along Green Lane are in excess of 200 metres to the north of the proposed site. The dwellings are beyond the river and trees, which line the river. From this direction it is possible to see the mast through the trees, but it would sit in front of the motorway and the sewage treatment works which are located beyond. Given this background and the distances involved it is unlikely that the proposal would be an incongruous or detrimental development. It is considered that these residents are unlikely to be seriously affected by the proposal. 5.10 In response to the letter of objection received, the issues relating to visual impact are set out in paragraphs 5.6 and 5.7 above. In reference to the noise from the generator, it is unlikely that the generator would produce noise levels above that of the two nearby motorways, which are in close proximity. 5.11 An ICNIRP Compliance Notice has been submitted which demonstrates that the installation would conform with the ICNIRP public exposure guidelines and conforms with the precautionary approach recommended by the Stewart Group’s report “mobile phones and health” laid out in Planning Policy Guidance Note 8: Telecommunication (August 2001). 5.12 Consideration has been given to the requirements of Article 8 and Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights. It is not considered that the granting of permission would result in a violation of any objectors’ rights under the Convention. Officers’ Recommendation GRANT subject to the following conditions: 1. No Departure (Full Applications) (C4) 2. The use hereby permitted shall be discontinued and the land restored to its former condition on or before 22nd May 2005. This would include the removal of the telecommunication tower, the associated equipment cabin, the generator and security fencing. Reason: To limit the effect of the proposal on this sensitive Green Belt site and its effect on the visual amenities of the area. 3. The mast, associated equipment cabinet and generator hereby permitted shall be painted grey or olive green unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning Authority.
Page 1 and 2: PLANNING COMMITTEE 21ST MAY 2003 WA
Page 3 and 4: 3.1 Brooklands has a long and compl
Page 5 and 6: 4.8 The ES has since been supplemen
Page 7 and 8: Flooding Issues 6.12 The site lies
Page 9 and 10: 5. Planning Considerations 5.1 The
Page 11 and 12: RU.03/0189 Date reg: 18/02/2003 War
Page 13 and 14: 4.5 No adverse comments have been r
Page 15 and 16: Informatives: 1. The applicant is a
Page 17: 3.1 This is a full application for
Page 23 and 24: Drawing Number: Date Received: 1059
Page 25 and 26: • The side extension would be uns
Page 29 and 30: 5.3 The terrace is two-storey with
Page 33 and 34: 5. Planning Considerations 5.1 The
Page 35 and 36: 2. Duration (Outline) (C2) - "(a) a
Page 37 and 38: oundary of the site in order to see
Page 39 and 40: 5.2 Development within the Green Be
Page 43 and 44: • Cannot see what has changed for
Page 45 and 46: was connected to the public sewer i
Page 47 and 48: 2. The site lies on the edge of the
Page 49 and 50: 4.3 The County Highways Authority h
Page 53 and 54: 5.3 The treble garage would however

Planning Applications - Runnymede Borough Council

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?