109824

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      18/00786/B                                     Page  1  of  5

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 18/00786/B Applicant : Sure IOM Ltd Proposal : Erection of 12 metre lattice tower and equipment cabin for telecommunications purposes Site Address : Ramsey & District Cottage Hospital Cumberland Road Ramsey Isle of Man IM8 3RH

Senior Planning Officer: Mr Jason Singleton Photo Taken : 27.09.2018 Site Visit :

Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 02.10.2018 __

Conditions and Notes for Approval

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions

C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with article 14 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No2) Order 2013 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

C 2. In the event of the lattice tower and equipment cabinets erected under this approval become redundant they must be taken down along with all ancillary infrastructure and be removed from the site within 3 months of the cessation of use and the land restored back to its previous state.

Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.

Plans/Drawings/Information:

This approval relates to drawings referenced IOM_54/010, IOM_54/011, IOM_54/012, IOM_54/013 and IOM_54/014, all date stamped 26th July 2018.

__

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons

None __

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      18/00786/B                                     Page  2  of  5

Officer’s Report

THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site, as identified in red, is the Ramsey & District Cottage Hospital located on the northern side of Cumberland Road in Ramsey. The hospital is set within a predominantly residential area to the east of Bowring Road.

1.2 The location of the proposal is within a patch of hard standing area that is screened from the highway by mature trees and 18m to the north of the existing chimney stacks which are 15m high.

PROPOSAL 2.1 Proposed is the installation of a 12m high free standing triangular lattice tower and supported by 1x equipment cabinets (1.6m x 2.15m x 2.2m) which house the associated electronic equipment at ground level. Affixed to the upper portions of the lattice tower are three mobile phone panel antennas and one 300m dish.

2.2 The application is accompanied by a certificate of compliance with the World Health Organisation's ICNIRP guidelines for public exposure. (ICNIRP - "International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation".)

2.3 The application also details, the proposed signal coverage from the antenna and estimated connection speeds for the users of the adjacent buildings and the wider surrounding area for residents. Confirmation from the applicant confirms this site has been selected in conjunction with the IOM Government Property's and GTS as the optimum location to provide coverage to the desired area.

PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The site has been the subject of a number of previous applications, none of which is directly relevant to the current proposal.

PLANNING POLICY 4.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is in an area designated as Cottage Hospital under the Ramsey Local Plan Order 1998 Map No. 1 (North).

4.2 The Local Plan has no policies of direct relevance, it is worth noting the text of paragraph 5.15, which is a 'recommendation', and states: "An overall plan for the whole area [Ramsey Cottage Hospital] encompassing the hospital, surgeries (doctors' and dentists' practices), Dalmeny and the open space areas in between should be formulated by the DHSS. No further incursion into the remaining area of open space for car parking or related uses shall be permitted prior to agreement between DLGE and DHSS of the overall plan. In addition, a traffic management plan shall be established for the whole area."

4.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this application;

4.3 General Policy 2 (GP2) (in part) Development which is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of this Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development: (b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them; (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality;

4.4 Infrastructure Policy 3:

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      18/00786/B                                     Page  3  of  5

"A balance must be struck between the need for new, evolving communications systems to satisfy residential and business demand and the impact that the necessary infrastructure will have upon the environment. Measures which may help to achieve a satisfactory balance will include a presumption against visually intrusive masts in sensitive landscapes, the encouragement of mast sharing by different operators, and the removal of redundant infrastructure. Exceptions to this policy would need to demonstrate a strategic national need, which cannot be otherwise secured by mast sharing or alternative locations."

REPRESENTATIONS 5.1 Ramsey Town Commissioners has no objection (received on 22/08/18)

5.2 Highways Services have commented and confirm there is no Highways Interest in the proposal (received on 22/08/18)

5.3 Public Health were consulted who have confirmed that if a ICNIRP certificate is in place they do not object (received on 23/10/18).

ASSESMENT 6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application is the visual impact of the proposed development; (GP2(b),(c) & (g) and (Infrastructure Policy 3)

6.2 Normally, under the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) (Telecommunications) Order 2013, permission is granted for the erection of masts under 15 metres high for telecommunication purposes with exceptions.

6.3 In this case, a full planning application was required as the proposed location would be within 20m of a highway "Grove Mount South", page 7, section 2 (i)" in the case of the installation of a mast, on a building or structure less than 15m in height, such a mast would be within 20m of a highway".

6.4 Considering the need, the new mast has been selected to provide the minimum mast height that will provide coverage to the area as per the IoM Government, requirements, as a code systems operator. The height and width of the mast are as a result of its function and purpose and the triangular design has been chosen as it is an open structure and will have a low visual impact on the amenity of the area.

6.5 Addressing the location, this position within the hospital area has been chosen as part of a screening process and addressing a weak spot in the area and within the hospital buildings. Other locations were considered, namely, within Grove Museum, but due to the topography a 22m high mast would have been required. Also considered was a roof mounted mast on top of the existing hospital building. Both locations were discounted in favour of the current proposal whose location and design is felt to sit within its setting more comfortably.

6.6 The specific position having been whittled down, is within close proximity to the existing generator and boiler buildings where there is also an existing 15m chimney close by and adjacent to 9m trees to the west. This setting helps to screen the lower part of the mast and would be set against the backdrop of the existing chimney structure.

6.7 It is clear from the application that there is a defined need for the proposal on behalf of the applicant. This need, as required by Infrastructure Policy 3, needs to be balanced against the likely visual impact arising from new equipment. In assessing this 'balance', it needs to be remembered that the location has been selected as the only practicable solution to the applicant's defined need such that the visual impact could not be altered through its being moved in position or height, as to do so would fail to meet that defined need.

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      18/00786/B                                     Page  4  of  5

6.8 Of more importance, though, is the design and specific siting of the proposed mast and equipment, and the extent to which the visual impact arising from its appearance would be appropriate. The opening sentence of Infrastructure Policy 3 is helpful:

"A balance must be struck between the need for new, evolving communications systems to satisfy residential and business demand and the impact that the necessary infrastructure will have upon the environment."

6.9 The proposed mast, of galvanised steel, and also of a minimal structure through which sky behind would be visible which would certainly be seen from nearby and also further afield. However the mast would be overshadowed by the existing 15m high chimney within 18m of the site. Given the chimney has already broken the skyline and is present when viewing the area from afar, the proposed 12m mast would not be considered to have any more of a harmful impact than the existing mast. With that said, It is not considered that the proposed mast would be considered an overbearing structure as to warrant the application's refusal. It would not result in loss of light and, while it may cast a shadow, this would not affect the existing hospital buildings, and moreover any such shadow would reflect the lattice nature of the mast and not be solid as is the existing chimney. On this basis, it is considered that the proposal would not create any visual harm and would conform to those parts of General Policy 2 and infrastructure Policy 3.

6.10 In terms of health issues associated with a telecommunication mast, the Isle of Man has no specific guidelines in how to deal with such concerns. However, guidance in the United Kingdom (since replaced with less specific guidance) expressly advised that where a proposed telecommunications installation conforms to the recommendation of The Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones ("The Stewart Report") and the guidelines for the public exposure set by The International Commission On Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), then the Local Planning Authority should have no concerns with regard to health and safety issues.

6.11 The application is accompanied by a certificate of compliance with the World Health Organisation ICNIRP guidelines for public exposure, and the 'Health and Safety at Work Inspectorate' is responsible for the monitoring of telecommunications installations to ensure compliance with the ICNIRP Guidelines. It is also noted that the Director of Public Health raises no objection when an ICNIRP certificate is in place.

7.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 7.1 For the above reasons, it is concluded that the planning application would not harm the use and enjoyment of neighbouring properties or the highway network and would comply with aforementioned planning policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and is recommended for approval.

INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 (Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent; (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested; (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

8.2 The decision-maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and

==== PAGE 5 ====

                                      18/00786/B                                     Page  5  of  5

o whether there are other persons to those listed in Article 6(4) who should be given Interested Person Status. __

I can confirm that this decision has been made by the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.

Decision Made : Permitted

Date : 23.10.2018

Determining officer

Signed : S BUTLER

Stephen Butler

Head of Development Management

Customer note

This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.