Plans for 50ft 5G mast in Sunderland refused at appeal after inspector rules it would do more harm than good

Sunderland City Council’s planning department previously refused an application for the telecoms mast, off Rotherfield Road, in November, 2022.

The site is based on pavement in the Hylton Red House estate, on the corner connecting Rotherfield Road, Rotherham Road and Rhodesia Road.

Plans from CK Hutchison Networks (UK) Ltd had been submitted as part of a drive to upgrade networks to provide improved coverage and capacity, including in relation to 5G services.

It was said that the proposed mast was the minimum height necessary to achieve the required service levels.

However council planning officers raised concerns about the visual impact of the installation and concluded that its scale, siting and design would “introduce an obtrusive and overdominant feature into the streetscape”.

It was also argued that the plans would result in “demonstrable harm to the visual amenity, character and appearance of the area”.

Following the refusal, applicants lodged an appeal with the Secretary of State and a planning inspector was appointed to rule on the matter.

In an appeal decision published this month, the planning inspector upheld the council’s refusal decision and dismissed the appeal.

A report from the planning inspector noted that the mast would be “significantly taller than the existing street lights” and would have “relatively bulky antennas”.

It was noted that the installation would be in a “particularly exposed position” and would be “conspicuous from several directions, by virtue of its corner location” and a “prominent feature in the open long views” from Redhill Road.

The planning inspector’s report continued: “The appellant suggests that the installation could be coloured to minimise its appearance.

“However, given the site’s prominent location, and the proposal’s height and design, this would not resolve the visual effect of the proposal.

“While I note that the proposal meets guidelines for non-ionising radiation protection and the area is not subject to heritage or other policy constraints, the mast would nevertheless be a visually intrusive feature.

“It would be sited in an exposed and open location and would be starkly incongruous and contrast with the verdant qualities of the locality.

“The visual intrusion would furthermore be experienced by significant numbers of local residents as they move between the residential areas, bus stops and playing fields”.

The planning inspector concluded that the plans would be “harmful to the character and appearance of the area” as well as clashing with several council planning policies.

While acknowledging the “clear public benefits” of improved digital wireless mobile coverage and 5G coverage, the planning inspector said this would not outweigh the development’s visual impact.

In addition, the planning inspector was “not satisfied that a robust review of the availability of alternative sites for the appeal scheme had been properly explored”.

The planning inspector’s report added: “I acknowledge that the appellant has demonstrated a requirement to upgrade the network to provide improved coverage and capacity, most notably in relation to 5G services.

“The framework supports the expansion of electronic communications networks, including next generation mobile technology and there would be important social and economic benefits from the proposed development which weigh in favour of the appeal.

“However, I afford significant weight to the harm to the character and appearance of the area arising from the siting and appearance of the proposed development.

“Given my above findings, the availability of less harmful alternative sites has not been properly explored and, therefore, the need for the development in this location does not outweigh the harm”.

The full appeal decision report can be found on the Planning Inspectorate’s website by searching reference: APP/J4525/W/23/3315562