A mobile phone company has lost two planning appeals for 5G masts in Rottingdean and Brighton.
Brighton and Hove City Council planning officers refused the applications by CK Hutchinson in December 2023 and the company appealed in February.
The company, which operates the Three network, wanted to put up masts at sites in Bazehill Road, Rottingdean, and Copse Hill, Brighton.
In both appeals, CK Hutchinson said that the 4G network was under strain from greater demands for mobile data which was available only through the 5G network.
The two sites currently have no 5G coverage.
The company said:
“The application site is within a suburban area with no existing 5G coverage and where there are no tall buildings or existing masts which could be shared by the appellant.
“Frankly, without installations such as this then suburban areas such as this will not get 5G coverage.”
The Copse Hill (below) application had 52 objections from the public and a further 30 comments against the appeal. There were 14 objections to the Rottingdean site.
Brighton and Hove City Council said that the reason for refusing the Copse Hill application was because CK Hutchinson had “failed to demonstrate through a robust site selection analysis, including the assessment of other potential buildings, that there are no alternative sites for the proposal which would be acceptable in regard to siting and appearance”.
Planning inspector Sylvia Leonard said that the proposed pole for Copse Hill would be higher and wider than the existing street lights and the new equipment would be “visually prominent”.
She said: “While options for siting the development are limited by technical and operational constraints, and the appellant states that alternative locations have been fully assessed, having regard to the evidence before me in respect of other sites, it is not demonstrated that other more suitable and less harmful sites for the development do not exist, and this weighs against the proposal.”
For the Rottingdean site, the council said:
“The development siting and appearance of the mast is not such that it would minimise as far as practical the visual impact on the South Downs National Park, contrary to its purpose of conserving the natural beauty of the area.
“The height of the mast would lead to it being highly visible above the surrounding treeline, presenting as an incongruous and alien addition to the landscape.”
For the Rottingdean proposal, the planning inspector cited the impact on the South Downs National Park (SDNP) as the reason for refusal.
The inspector said:
“The purposes of the national park include conserving its natural beauty and promoting opportunities for the enjoyment of its special qualities.
“However, no compelling analysis of the visual impact of the development from locations within SDNP has been provided by the appellant.
“Nor has such analysis been provided in connection with the alternative sites identified by the appellant.”
‘A Kick In The Teeth For Lewes’: Lib Dem MP Expresses Disappointment Over Bus Station Loss
Results For Worthing’s Bathing Water Sites Revealed
£100,000 Robbery Of Bexhill Mobile Phone Store
Organisations In Wealden Receive Funding To Help Tackle Inequalities In Physical Activity
Festive Children’s Stories Brought To Life With Interactive Story Session
Jail Time For Shop Owner Who Sold Illegal Tobacco
Funding Boost For Community-Led Waste Prevention Projects In West Sussex
Newhaven RNLI Welcomes Quartet Of Mayors To Share Gratitude
University Of Brighton Launches Health Innovation Hub To Tackle Health Challenges
New Residential Care Home For Disabled Children In Brighton