SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION FORM

1. Site details

Site Name Torside Reservoir Site Torside Reservoir NGR 405648E 398504N Address Pennine Way Glossop Derbyshire SK13 1HY Site Ref ESN5048/75287 Site Macrocell Number Type1

2. Pre Application Check list

Site selection

Was a local planning authority mast register available to check Yes No for suitable sites by the operator or the local planning authority? if no explain why:

The Local Planning Authority does not have a mast register. Was the industry site database checked for suitable sites by Yes No the operator? if no explain why:

Industry site databases where checked, however no sites in the area are shareable or able to provide the required coverage into the valley.

Annual Area Wide Information to local planning authority

Date of information submission to local planning N/A authority Name of contact N/A Summary of issues raised:

Information not available.

Pre-application consultation with local planning authority

Date of written offer of pre-application consultation Was there pre-application contact Yes No Date of pre-application contact 08/05/2017 Name of contact N/a Summary of outcome/Main issues raised

No comments received to date.

Ten Commitments Consultation

Rating of Site under Traffic Light Model Red Amber Green Outline Consultation carried out:

Letters were sent on the 8th May 2017 to: Councillor Pat Jenner Tintwistle Parish Council Andrew Bingham MP Highstones lodge Hollins Farm Reservoir Keepers Cottage Quiet Shepherd Farm

Summary of outcome/Main issues raised

No response received to date.

School/College

Location of site in relation to school/college (include name of school/college)

N/a – No nearby schools. The nearest school is Padfield Community Primary School sited some 3.5km South West of the nominated site.

Outline of consultation carried out with school/college (include evidence of consultation)

N/a Summary of outcome/Main issues raised N/a

Civil Aviation Authority/Secretary of State for the Defence/Aerodrome Operator consultation (only required for an application for prior approval)

Will the structure be within 3km of an Yes No aerodrome or airfield? Has the Civil Aviation Yes No Authority/Secretary of State for Defence/Aerodrome Operator been notified Details of response: N/A

Developer’s Notice

Copy of Developer’s Notice enclosed Yes No Date served Full Planning

3.0 Proposed Development

The proposed site The application site is located in a remote rural area overlooking Torside Reservoir within the Peak District National Park. Torside Reservoir is sited some 75m South of the site, while Rhodeswood Reservoir lies approximately 200m South West of the site with a dam in between the two reservoirs with a public footpath known as the Pennine Way located on top of the dam.

The nearest settlement is Padfield about 3.1km South West of the site. the outskirts of the larger settlement of Glossop is some 3.5km South West of the site, whilst Hadfield is about 3.75km to the South West. The centre of Manchester is about 21.8km West of the site.

The area may be described as undulating with partially wooded areas surrounding inland water in the form of a series of reservoirs. There are currently existing network coverage gaps along the B6105 fronting onto Torside Reservoir and the current application seeks to rectify this problem to the benefit of not only local residents and visitors to the area but also more importantly the Emergency Services. Being sited within the National Park the area attracts significant numbers of tourists, hence the need to ensure that coverage is provided for the 3 Emergency Services in the event of an emergency.

The topography of the area presents significant problems in finding a suitable solution for improved telecommunications coverage in this remote rural area. The proposed site, whilst sited within the Peak District National Park, is not within any areas of significance, SSSI’s , SAC’s or other planning designations unlike much of the surrounding land.

Whilst there are nearby SSSI’s and SAC’s in the area, they are mostly set back

from the reservoir and accordingly have been avoided.The nearest SSSI/SAC is the Dark Peak SSSI and South Pennine Moors SAC sited some 550m North and 950m South of the nominated site. Whilst the proposed mast will be visible from the SSSI, it will be on lower ground, with a backdrop/ intervening belt of high level trees and vegetation. Furthermore, it will form one of a number of vertical elements in this setting in the form of telegraph poles/ overhead power lines and lampposts, as well as high level trees. It is important to note that there is a series of high level pylons on the southern side of the reservoir, one of which accommodates an Arqiva site approximately 395m South East of the site, highlighted in the discounted options below. The site does not lie within a Conservation Area and there are no nearby listed buildings. The nearest historic asset if a Roman Fortlet, 320m East of Highstones located approximately 890m North East of the nominated site with an intervening dense belt of woodland and high level trees immediately adjacent to the site such that the proposed development will not cause any undue harm. The nearest listed building is 1.58km North East and thus is sufficiently far away to avoid any undue harm due to changes in topography and intervening trees and woodland. Whilst there are nearby residential properties to the North, West and South of the site in question there are nearby 20m trees which are either intervening or provide a backdrop to the proposed mast. The nearest property with views towards the site is known as Reservoir Keepers Cottage which is approximately 150m West of the site. however, the mast will be seen against a backdrop of 20m trees and accordingly will not be unduly dominant or cause any undue harm to the amenities of the occupiers of the property. Furthermore, the series of overhead power lines on the southern side of the reservoir are far more dominant than the proposed mast will be. In all these circumstances it is concluded that there will be no undue visual intrusion and the amenity of nearby occupiers will not be unduly harmed. The trees referred to above are located approximately 5m to the North of the proposed site compound behind a 1.6mhigh dry stone wall. These trees will provide context and a backdrop for the proposed telecommunications mast. Immediately to the west of the proposed compound approximately 2m away there is a 4m high single storey building. The land falls away by approximately 9m towards the Reservoir and rises steeply on either side of the reservoir such that the application site lies within the valley.

View looking North towards the site from the South

View looking South from the dam looking towards the electricity pylon on the southern side of Torside Reservoir

View looking East over Torside Reservoir

View looking West from the dam towards Rhodeswood Reservoir

View looking West towards Reservoir Keepers Cottage approximately 150m West of the site.

Planning History

There is no relevant planning history relevant to the application site. However, the following applications within the vicinity are of some relevance in this instance.

NP/HPK/0605/0629- Installation of telecommunications equipment and building, Pylon 4Z0218 land off Torside reservoir. Granted conditionally 28/11/2005

HPK/0802126- Addition of 2 antenna and 1 dish to existing pylon, pylon 4Z0218, land off Torsdie Reservoir. Granted conditionally 10/10/2002

HPK/0400060- Installation of 6 antennas and 4 dishes to existing pylon, pylon 4Z0218, land off Torsdie Reservoir. Granted conditionally 08/06/2000

HPK/0599076- Erection of high voltage overhead line supported on wood poles, Torside Reservoir Dam, Longdendale. Granted Conditionally 19/07/1999

Elsewhere within the Peak District National Park Authority area the following applications are also of some relevance.

HPK/200/75 - Erection of 10m telecommunications tower and associated equipment building, Rowlee Farm, Snake Road, Upper Derwent Valley Granted conditionally 20/11/2001

NP/HPK/0704/0840 - Erection of 18m lightweight lattice telecommunications mast & associated equipment, Doctors Gate Culvert, Snake Pass, Hope Woodlands. Granted conditionally 11/02/2005

NP/HPK/0705/0717- Extension to existing 9m mast to accommodate 2 no. additional antenna and associated equipment cabin, Hagg Barn, Hagglor Coppice, Hagg Side Granted conditionally 11/02/2005

HPK/1099129- Erection of 8m telecommunications mast with street cabinet, Footway near payphone, adjacent Ladybower Reservoir. Granted conditionally 01/02/2000

HPK/1100162- Replace existing 25m mast with new 30m mast and addition of 3 no. antennas and 2 no. dishes, Radio Site, Hope Works, Eccles Lane Granted conditionally 19/02/2001

HPK/0897115 - 4x sector antennas, 2 x dishes and equipment cubicle and ancillary equipment, CTI’s Hope Transmitting Station, Hope Works, Eccles Lane. Granted conditionally 16/10/1997

HPK/110169- Erection of 25m telecommunications tower with 4 no. antennas, 2 dishes and associated equipment cabin, Ashopton Sawmills off A57, Bamford. Granted conditionally 20/11/2001

HPK/0301040- Erection of 25m tower within fenced compound, Snake Pass Clearing, off Snake Road, Granted conditionally 20/11/2001

HPK/0202028 – 15m Telecommunications Tower, land at Hope Works, Eccles Lane. Granted temporarily 14/05/2001

HPK/0397028- 2 Sector antennas to be added to existing tower, installation of equipment cubicle,BBC Hope Transmission Station, Hope Works, Eccles Lane Granted conditionally 29/04/1997

HPK/0502073- Erection of 9m lightweight lattice telecommunications mast, Haggside, Snake Pass Refused 03/09/2002

HPK/0502080- Erection of 9m telecommunications mast, Doctors gate Culvert, Snake Pass Refused 03/09/2002

HPK/1198161- 6m pole with antennas and equipment cabin, Wood Cottage, Snake Road, Bamford Refused 23/12/19999

HPK/050364- Erection of 18m lattice telecommunications mast equipment cabin and associated equipment, Winhill Plantation, Winhill Refused 08/09/2003

NP/HPK/0204/0187 – Erection of 18m lightweight lattice telecommunications mast, antennae and associated equipment cabin, Winhill Plantation, Winhill, Hope Woodlands Refused 15/06/2004

NP/HPK/0604/0683 – Redevelopment of existing telecommunications mast to enable site share and small extension to existing cabin, Snake Pass, A58, Hope Woodlands Refused 27/05/2005 HPK/198166 – Erection of 15m mast with equipment cabin, Lady Clough Forest, off A57, Glossop Refused 27/06/2000

HPK/1198162- 6m monopole with antennas and two equipment cabins, Two Torne Fields Farm, Snake Road, Bamford Refused 12/04/1999.

It is therefore clear from the above that similar proposals have been approved in the vicinity of the application site. Indeed some of the approved masts are significantly larger than that currently proposed. Furthermore, as highlighted above, much of the surrounding land is far more sensitive in character than the nominated site.

Enclose map showing the cell centre and existing sites within the cell and adjoining cells

AWAITING COVERAGE PLOTS.

Type of Structure (e.g. tower, mast, etc): Description: The installation of a 15m telegraph pole incorporating 2 no. antennas, 2 no. transmission dishes, 1 no. 1.2m satellite dish, 1 no. equipment cabinet and a meter cabinet within a secure compound and development ancillary thereto.

Overall Height: 15m Height of existing building (where applicable) metres

Equipment Housing Length 1.9m 0.6m metres Width 0.7m 0.5m metres Height 1.6m 1.5m metres Materials (as applicable) Tower/mast etc – type of material and external colour

Hutchison Engineering Telegraph pole - Brown Equipment housing – type of material and external colour

Equipment cabinet- Merlin Green (6009) 1.8m security fencing- Merlin Green (6009)

Reasons for choice of Design

The proposal is for a 15m Hutchison Engineering Telegraph Pole incorporating 2 no. antennas, 2 no. transmission dishes, 1 no. 1.2m satellite dish on a support pole and 1 no. cabinets and a meter cabinet, 1 no. permanent generator within a secure compound. The telegraph pole will have a brown finish, the antenna will be internal and all low level equipment such as the cabinets will be painted green. The height of 15m has been chosen due to the height of the nearby trees and general site topography in order to provide coverage for the ESN on surrounding roads. Access to the site will be from an upgraded section of track from the existing road, ensuring that there is minimum disturbance to the surrounding land. The access track will lead to the secure compound 4m x 4m formed from 1.8m high fence panels with 4097 mesh and vertical 3 strand barbed wire with a green finish. Access into the compound for authorised personnel only will be via a 1m wide access gate.

During the design process the design of the mast has evolved to take account of its rural surroundings such that the impact on the environment is minimised. A telegraph pole is proposed which is considered to have a less intrusive form in the light of the existence of other telegraph poles within the surrounding area. It will therefore be seen as one of a number of other vertical elements in the environment with the nearby trees providing a backdrop and context.

4.0 Technical information

International Commission on Non-Ionizing Yes No Radiation Protection Declaration attached (see below)* International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection public compliance is determined by mathematical calculation and implemented by careful location of antennas, access restrictions and/or barriers and signage as necessary. Members of the public cannot unknowingly enter areas close to the antennas where exposure may exceed the relevant guidelines. When determining compliance the emissions from all mobile phone network operators on or near to the site are taken into account. In order to minimise interference within its own network and with other radio networks, EE (UK) Ltd operates its network in such a way the radio frequency power outputs are kept to the lowest levels commensurate with effective service provision As part of EE (UK) Limited’s network, the radio base station that is the subject of this application will be configured to operate in this way. All operators of radio transmitters are under a legal obligation to operate those transmitters in accordance with the conditions of their licence. Operation of the transmitter in accordance with the conditions of the licence fulfils the legal obligations in respect of interference to other radio systems, other electrical equipment, instrumentation or air traffic systems. The conditions of the licence are mandated by Ofcom, an agency of national government, who are responsible for the regulation of the civilian radio spectrum. The remit of Ofcom also includes investigation and remedy of any reported significant interference. The telecommunications infrastructure the subject of this application accords with all relevant legislation and as such will not cause significant and irremediable interference with other electrical equipment, air traffic services or instrumentation operated in the national interest.

Frequency LTE 1800 + GSM Modulation characteristics2 GMSK & QPSK Power output (expressed in EIRP in dBW per 56 dBm carrier) In order to minimise interference within its own network and with other radio networks, EE operates its network in such a way that radio frequency power outputs are kept to the lowest levels commensurate with effective service provision. As part of EE’s network, the radio base station that is the subject of this application will be configured to operate in this way. Height of antenna (m above ground level) 15m

5.0 Technical Justification Enclose predictive coverage plots if appropriate, e.g. to show coverage improvement. Proposals to improve capacity will not generally require coverage plots.

AWAITING COVERAGE PLOTS

2 The modulation method employed in GSM is GMSK (Gaussian Minimum Shift Keying) which is a form of Phase Modulation. The modulation method employed in UMTS is QPSK (Quad Phase Shift Keying) which is another form of Phase Modulation.

Background:

As part of EE’s continued network improvement program, there is a specific requirement for a radio base station at this location to provide both ESN and 4G coverage to the surrounding area. Roll out of the sites is subject to Home Office time-scales, the sites need to be operational by summer 2017. To enable sufficient time for site construction, planning applications need to be submitted as soon as possible.

Today the 3 Emergency Services (3ES) and over 300 other public safety and national contingency organisations across England, Scotland and Wales use a mobile radio system (Airwave) to communicate within and between the 3ES but this needs replacement and ESN has been procured competitively by the Home Office to provide a high-quality service that makes full use of the latest technology in the telecoms sector. EE has been selected to provide the ESN service through their existing site network and where necessary the addition of new base station sites.

A key requirement of ESN is to deliver coverage to major and minor roads which will require additional infrastructure to be provided by EE. This proposal forms part of that coverage requirement and therefore infrastructure needs to be located in proximity of the surrounding minor roads overlooking Derwent Reservoir.

In addition to the 3ES, wherever possible, infrastructure proposed by EE will offer a 4G mobile service to local EE customers, providing access to digital services that are increasingly essential to everyday life and business and a 999 service to all mobile users. Other operators will also have access to the new infrastructure should they wish to install their own equipment and offer services in future.

Base stations use radio signals to connect mobile devices and phones to the network, enabling people to send and receive; calls, texts, emails, pictures, web, TV and downloads. Without base stations, mobiles devices and phones will not work.

Many other everyday items also use radio signals to send and receive information, such as television and radio broadcasting equipment and two-way radio communications. Base stations are connected to each other and telephone exchange buildings by cables or wireless technology such as microwave dishes, to create the network. The area each base station covers is called a “cell”. Each cell overlaps with its neighbouring cells to create a continuous network. The size and shape of each cell is determined by the features of the surrounding area, such as buildings, trees and hills which can block signals. When people travel between cells, the signal is transferred between base stations without a break in service. Each base station covers a certain area only and can only handle a limited number of calls at once. As mobile phones and devices become more popular, more base stations are needed to ensure continuous coverage.

An installation is required within this area to provide coverage for sections of the B6105 and surrounding minor roads overlooking Torside Reservoir. Due to the topography, landscape and planning designations in the area, providing coverage will be difficult. In order to provide coverage at an adequate level, a reasonably

elevated position will be required with line of sight to the target road. Whilst the proposed site lies within the Peak District National Park, it is not within any areas of significance, planning designations or near to any listed buildings or scheduled monuments.

The site and its equipment is initially for EE, however should other operators wish to improve their coverage, the solution would also allow the site to be shared, preventing the need for additional installations in the area in the vicinity.

To make rural sites such as the proposed feasible, “Line of Sight” to an existing site is required. This connects the new installation into the network via microwave dishes. As such, a large proportion of the surrounding area would not be a feasible option due to the lack of “Line of Sight”. An alternative option is to use a “Hop”, these acts as a middle point and connect two sites together. Whilst this is an option, it is not preferred as it adds the requirement of an additional mast within the local vicinity.

All EE installations are designed to be fully compliant with the public exposure guidelines established by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). These guidelines have the support of UK Government, the European Union and they also have the formal backing of the World Health Organisation. A certificate of ICNIRP compliance will be included within the planning submission.

Alternative sites considered and not chosen (not generally required for upgrades/alterations to existing sites including redevelopment of an existing site to facilitate an upgrade or sharing with another operator). Site3 Site Name and address National Grid Reason for not choosing4 Reference Arqiva National Arqiva National Grid Ref 405744E 398110N The option has been discounted due to access restrictions, Grid Ref 252171 252171 as well as a long acquisition build process which would preclude the suitability of the site for operational reasons. The site is to provide Emergency Services coverage which needs to be operational by August 2017. 24hr access would also be required which would not be possible due to health and safety restrictions.

Torside Torside Reservoir GF 405576E 398444N This option was discounted due to no interest from the site Reservoir GF provider. Without the site provider’s consent this option can no longer be pursued.

Pennine Way Pennine Way 405978E 397958N This option was discussed with the LPA during the meeting on site on 16th January 2017. The LPA confirmed that the nominated option represents a preferable solution to proving the required network coverage improvements. Accordingly the site was discounted.

Reaps Farm Reaps Farm 406280E 397908N The site provider confirmed no interest. Without the consent of the site provider the site cannot be pursued.

3 ETS - Existing Telecomm site, ES - Existing Structure, RT - Roof Top, GF - Greenfield 4 SP - Site Provider, RD - Redevelopment Not Possible, T - Technical Difficulties, P – Planning O – Other

Old House Old House 404967E 397892N No response was received from the site provider. Without the consent of the site provider the site cannot be pursued.

The Hollins The Hollins 405560E 398556N No response was received from the site provider. Without the consent of the site provider the site cannot be pursued.

Quiet Shepard Quiet Shepard Farm 405580E 398625N No response was received from the site provider. Without Farm the consent of the site provider the site cannot be pursued.

Car Park Car Park 406816E 398340N This site was discounted as there is no power available. Without power the site would not be suitable and accordingly it has been discounted.

Sailing Club Sailing Club 406772E 398466N This site was discounted as there is no power available. Without power the site would not be suitable and accordingly it has been discounted.

If no alternative site options have been investigated, please explain why

Additional relevant information

Planning Policy Assessment

In line with National Planning Policy guidance and the relevant policies of the Development Plan, the impact of the development is minimised through the chosen access arrangements proposed which are appropriate to the site’s setting within a remote rural area.

The proposal has been designed with the aim of achieving a balance between minimising visual impact where possible, and achieving the technical requirements for EE (UK) Ltd and H3G (UK) Ltd.

National Planning Policy Framework (2012)

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) set out Central Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. It replaces a number of planning documents including Planning Policy Guidance 8 - Telecommunication. NPPF sets out the Central Government’s requirements for the planning system only to the extent that it is relevant, proportionate and necessary to do so. It provides a framework within which local people and their accountable councils can produce their own distinctive local and neighbourhood plans, which reflect the needs and priorities of their communities.

Pertinent to telecommunications development section 5 of NPPF sets out the Governments general overview regarding supporting high quality communications infrastructure and is stated as follows: -

“42. Advanced, high quality communications infrastructure is essential for sustainable economic growth. The development of high speed broadband technology and other communications networks also plays a vital role in enhancing the provision of local community facilities and services.”

“43. In preparing Local Plans, local planning authorities should support the expansion of electronic communications networks, including telecommunications and high speed broadband. They should aim to keep the numbers of radio and telecommunications masts and the sites for such installations to a minimum consistent with the efficient operation of the network. Existing masts, buildings and other structures should be used, unless the need for a new site has been justified. Where new sites are required, equipment should be sympathetically designed and camouflaged where appropriate.”

The proposed development seeks to uphold these objectives by introducing significant network improvements to this remote rural area. This will benefit not only local residents and visitors to the area but will support the requirements of the Emergency Services. There are currently gaps in coverage within the local area and the proposed development seeks to provide an appropriate solution to the problem whilst at the same time introducing new technologies to the area. Every effort has

17 been made to consider the use of alternative sites and existing structures within the vicinity. However no suitable alternative has been found in this instance. The proposed mast has been specifically designed for the site in question and takes full account of its setting, utilising camouflage techniques to enable the structure to be easily assimilated into its environment.

“44. Local planning authorities should not impose a ban on new telecommunications development in certain areas, impose blanket Article 4 directions over a wide area or a wide range of telecommunications development or insist on minimum distances between new telecommunications development and existing development. They should ensure that:  they have evidence to demonstrate that telecommunications infrastructure will not cause significant and irremediable interference with other electrical equipment, air traffic services or instrumentation operated in the national interest; and  they have considered the possibility of the construction of new buildings or other structures interfering with broadcast and telecommunications services.

46. Local planning authorities must determine applications on planning grounds. They should not seek to prevent competition between different operators, question the need for the telecommunications system, or determine health safeguards if the proposal meets International Commission guidelines for public exposure.”

The proposal is required for the efficient operation of the network and has been sympathetically designed to ensure that it has minimal impact on the surrounding environment. It will allow the provision of high quality communications infrastructure to the benefit of the community and local residents and will provide an essential service for the emergency services. In all these circumstances the proposal represents the best available option and therefore complies with the aims and objectives of the NPPF.

The limited impact of the proposed development is considered to be outweighed by the provision of high quality improved modern communications networks to the area, in the wider public interest.

It is therefore considered that a balance has been struck between the technical requirements of the operators, and the impact of the proposal on the immediate environment. In all these circumstances, it is considered that the elements outlined above combine to demonstrate that the proposal will cause no undue harm to any interests of acknowledged importance.

The proposed development is therefore considered to be in accordance with all relevant sections of the NPPF.

18

Local Planning Policy

The site is located within the Peak District National Park and the relevant adopted development plan is the Peak District National Park, Local Plan (2001) which is the process of being replaced by the Local Development Framework Core Strategy. The Local Plan still contains a number of detailed operational policies that are still valid and will be so until the Local Plan has been fully replaced. Accordingly the Local plan should be considered in conjunction with emerging policy in the form of the Local Development framework – Core Strategy Development Plan Document, adopted October 2011.

PEAK DISTRICT NATIONAL PARK Local Plan (2001)

“Policy LC4: Design, layout and landscaping

(a) Where development is acceptable in principle, it will be permitted provided that its detailed treatment is of a high standard that respects, conserves and where possible it enhances the landscape, built environment and other valued characteristics of the area. (b) Particular attention will be paid to: (i) scale, form, mass and orientation in relation to existing buildings, settlement form and character, landscape features and the wider landscape setting; and (ii) the degree to which design details, materials and finishes reflect or complement the style and traditions of local buildings; and (iii) and the use and maintenance of landscaping to enhance new development, and the degree to which this makes use of local features and an appropriate mix of species suited to both the landscape and wildlife interests of the locality; and (iv) the amenity, privacy and security of the development and of nearby properties; and (v) and any nuisance, or harm to the rural character of the area, caused by lighting schemes.”

The proposed mast has been specifically designed for the site in question and takes full account of the site and its surroundings. The siting of telecommunications apparatus is location dependent in order to function effectively. In this instance a deficit in coverage has been identified for the ESN and EE along the B6105 on the Southern side of Torside Reservoir in the vicinity of the nominated site. The proposed mast has been sited close to a nearby high level trees rising to a height of approximately 20m, approximately 5m away from the nominated site in order to provide a backdrop and context. There are other vertical elements of similar character in the area in the form of telegraph poles, which the proposed mast seeks to replicate. Furthermore, on the southern side of the reservoir there is a series of high level electricity pylons which are far more visually dominant than the proposed mast will be. The height of the proposed mast is the minimum height capable of providing the required network improvements as the target road is sited on the other

19 side of the reservoir some 450m South of the site. It requires a reasonably elevated positive in order to have sight of the target road, but its backdrop of high level trees will ensure that it is easily assimilated in this context.

The telegraph pole design of the mast seeks to replicate structures that are already seen in the environment and all the associated equipment is to have a green painted finish to blend in with its green backdrop. It will not result in the loss of any trees or landscape features, although the ground to the rear of the site may need to be locally regraded and vegetation trimmed back to enable construction.

The proposed mast is sufficiently far away from nearby residential properties to avoid conflict with the residential amenities of the relevant occupiers. The proposed mast is to be sited within a secure compound to avoid conflict with the surrounding uses, with access for authorised personnel only. No harm to privacy or nuisance caused by lighting or noise will result. The mast will be integrated into its environment as far as possible. Any perceived negative impacts are far outweighed by the overall benefits of the proposal.

Should it be considered necessary or appropriate the applicant would be happy to include additional landscaping to offset the trimming of existing vegetation that will be required during the construction process.

“Policy LC20: Protecting trees, woodlands or other landscape features put at risk by development

(a) Planning applications should provide sufficient information to enable their impact on trees, woodlands and other landscape features to be properly considered. (b) Where development that involves risk of damage to trees, woodlands or other landscape features is acceptable, adequate space must be left for their replacement with appropriate species of trees and shrubs or local materials. Appropriate maintenance that respects wildlife interests will be required.”

The proposal will not result in the loss of trees or any significant landscape features. Indeed they will be used to their advantage, providing a backdrop to the mast. Wildlife interests will be maintained. As stated above, the applicant would be prepared to provide additional landscaping should it be required. Furthermore, the compound is sited approximately 5-6m from the tree line to avoid conflict with the nearby trees.

“8.22 Modern telecommunications networks are useful in reducing the need to travel, by allowing for home working and 'telecottage' type development. They can be a vital aid to business and to emergency services and the management of traffic. Mobile telephones are rapidly becoming an everyday convenience. However, as with other utility company development, the National Park Authority should carefully avoid harmful impacts that this type of development can give rise to. Telecommunications development proposed within the National Park to meet an external national or regional need rather than to improve services within it may

20

well be of a scale which would cause significant and damaging visual harm. The impact of all telecommunications infrastructure including that needed to improve services within the National Park itself should always be minimised (See Policies LU1 and LU2).

8.23 Where a mast or similarly obtrusive structure is proposed and likely to be accepted, the National Park Authority will seek to achieve the least environmentally damaging but operationally acceptable location. It will request that the full range of technical information is supplied by the company regarding the siting, size and design of the equipment proposed to facilitate evaluation of the least obtrusive but technically feasible development. New equipment should always be mounted on an existing structure if technically possible and development should be located at the least obtrusive site. Particular care is needed to avoid damaging the sense of remoteness of the higher hills, moorlands, edges or other prominent and skyline sites. Upland or elevated agricultural buildings, which are not uncommon in the National Park, may provide a suitable alternative to new structures in the landscape. If necessary, the National Park Authority will seek expert advice to help assess and minimise the impact of the design and sitting of telecommunications infrastructure.”

“Policy LU5: Telecommunications infrastructure

(a) Telecommunications infrastructure will be permitted provided that: (i) the landscape, built heritage or other valued characteristics of the National Park are not harmed; and (ii) it is not feasible to locate the development outside the National Park where it would have less impact; and (iii) the least obtrusive or damaging, technically practicable location, size, design and colouring of the structure and any ancillary equipment, together with appropriate landscaping, can be secured. (b) Wherever possible, and where a reduction in the overall impact on the National Park can be achieved, telecommunications equipment should be mounted on existing masts, buildings and structures. Telecommunications equipment that extends above the roofline of a building on which it is mounted will only be allowed where it is the least damaging alternative. (c) Substantial new development such as a mast or building for the remote operation and monitoring of equipment or plant not part of the code-system operators network will not be permitted. “

In searching for a suitable site every effort was made to avoid the more sensitive locations surrounding the site to the North, South, East and West and a significant part of the surrounding environment also accommodates a series of reservoirs thereby further limiting the areas available. Much of the surrounding area forming the majority of the search area is located within more sensitive locations including SAC’s and SSSI’s. Accordingly only limited sites were available that would provide suitable coverage without compromising the character and appearance of the area. The nominated site falls outside all these areas, provides adequate line of sight to the target road and benefits from adjacent high level trees which provide context

21 and a backdrop for the proposed scheme. Furthermore, there are other similar structures in the area in the form of telegraph poles and the series of pylons on the southern side of the reservoir are far more visually dominant than the proposed mast will be. It is not possible to locate the mast outside the National Park as the entire search area falls within it and there are no existing masts in the vicinity or other suitable structures which could accommodate the required equipment.

The mast is to be sited on the least intrusive/damaging and technically practical location available. Furthermore the mast has been specifically designed for the site in question and designed to reflect other vertical elements in the vicinity in the form of telegraph poles. It siting close to a nearby high level trees will provide context as well as a backdrop. All the associated equipment is to have a green painted finish in order to enable the development to be easily assimilated into its environment.

The proposed development is required to provide an essential service to the 3ES, by providing improvements in network coverage in areas which are currently without coverage. In seeking a suitable solution every effort has been made to respect the character, appearance and local distinctiveness of the landscape. The nominated site is considered to be the least sensitive available within the locality. The mast has been specifically designed for the site in question and has endeavoured to utilise suitable camouflage techniques in terms of form and colour to achieve the desired aim. The height of the mast is the minimum capable of achieving the required coverage. In all these circumstances, the proposal is considered to respect the landscape character of the area as far as it is able to within such a sensitive rural location. Any perceived negative impacts are far outweighed by the overall benefits of the scheme.

LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK- CORE STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT (Adopted October 2011)

Setting of the National Park

3.31 The East Midlands Regional Plan policies 8 and 9 state that policies and programmes in and around the Peak Sub-area should help secure the conservation and enhancement of the Peak District National Park, respecting the statutory purposes of its designation. Care must be taken to ensure that all development respects and enhances the high quality environment of the area, including the setting of the National Park. Various areas of core policy add value to this context such as the inclusion in valued characteristics of flow of landscape character across and beyond the National Park boundary; providing a continuity of landscape and valued setting for the National Park.

GSP1: Securing national park purposes and sustainable development

A. All policies must be read in combination. B. All development shall be consistent with the National Park’s legal purposes and duty. C. Where there is an irreconcilable conflict between the statutory purposes, the

22

Sandford Principle will be applied and the conservation and enhancement of the National Park will be given priority. D. Where national park purposes can be secured, opportunities must be taken to contribute to the sustainable development of the area E. In securing national park purposes major development should not take place within the Peak District National Park other than in exceptional circumstances. Major development will only be permitted following rigorous consideration of the criteria in national policy. F. Where a proposal for major development can demonstrate a significant net benefit to the National Park, every effort to mitigate potential localised harm and compensate for any residual harm to the area’s valued characteristics would be expected to be secured.

The proposed development is small in scale and a location outside the National Park would not be possible in this instance. Telecommunications developments are location dependent in order to function effectively. In siting the mast, due consideration has been given to the potential for visual intrusion. The topography of the surrounding area and the quality of the landscape in the area has been taken into account. The mast is to be sited in the least intrusive location possible within the parameters of sites available within the search area. Furthermore, the mast has been specifically designed for the site in question, in order to provide a solution with minimum negative impacts on the environment.

The height of the mast is the minimum capable of achieving the required coverage and every effort has been made to ensure that the proposal uses appropriate camouflage techniques as promoted within the NPPF as highlighted above. It is therefore concluded that the proposed development seeks to minimise any potential adverse impact on the local environment.

The proposed development seeks to balance the needs of providing coverage for the ESN, with the potential environmental impacts on the character and appearance of the area. Full account has been taken of the land use designations of the site and its surroundings as highlighted above. It is concluded that the proposed development will not cause undue harm to any interest of acknowledged importance. Any perceived negative impact is far outweighed by the overall benefits of the scheme. The proposed mast will provide an essential facility for the Emergency Services resolving the current telecommunications coverage gaps, as well as providing benefits to local residents, visitors to the area and the community generally. The Recreation Zone within which the mast is sited and the fact that the National Park Designation acts as a tourist attraction and the proximity of Manchester to the West means that greater numbers of people are likely to visit this remote rural area than might otherwise be the case. Accordingly, enhanced visitor numbers further exacerbate the need for an unbroken network for the Emergency Services and no undue localised harm will result and the overall character and appearance of the area will be maintained. Any perceived negative impacts are far outweighed by the overall benefits of the proposal.

“GSP2: Enhancing the National Park

23

A. Opportunities for enhancing the valued characteristics of the National Park will be identified and acted upon. B. Proposals intended to enhance the National Park will need to demonstrate that they offer significant overall benefit to the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area. They should not undermine the achievement of other Core Policies. C. When development is permitted, a design will be sought that respects the character of the area, and where appropriate, landscaping and planting schemes will be sought that are consistent with local landscape characteristics and their setting, complementing the locality and helping to achieve biodiversity objectives. D. Opportunities will be taken to enhance the National Park by the treatment or removal of undesirable features or buildings. Work must be undertaken in a manner which conserves the valued characteristics of the site and its surroundings. E. Development in settlements necessary for the treatment, removal or relocation of non-conforming uses to an acceptable site, or which would enhance the valued characteristics of the National Park will be permitted. In such cases a site brief may be necessary to achieve the best mix of uses to secure the conservation and enhancement of the National Park and the most sustainable outcome for the community.”

The National Park provides an area of natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage to the benefit of all. Accordingly the natural assets of the area need to be carefully managed whilst at the same time ensuring that residents and visitors to the area benefit from an appropriate level of facilities. This includes the need for appropriate telecommunications facilities. Network planners have identified coverage gaps within the network which the proposed development seeks to rectify. The mast is sited well away from residential properties and outside more sensitive locations surrounding the site including SSSI’s, SAC’s, and National Nature Reserves further away, as well as the nearby listed buildings and scheduled ancient monuments. The nominated site represents the optimum solution available within the search area and the proposed design respects the site’s characteristics.

Furthermore, the mast has been specifically designed for the site in question taking into account the site specific characteristics in order to devise a scheme which will blend in with its background. Due care and attention has been paid to the landscape features to ensure that the mast blend in with its green backdrop. The telegraph pole design will be seen in the context of the nearby high level trees and other telegraph poles in the surrounding areas. The camouflage techniques employed will ensure that its impact on the local environment will be limited. It is not considered appropriate to provide additional landscaping in this instance as the site is located within a green backdrop and all low level equipment finished accordingly.

Full consideration has been given to seeking alternative sites and solutions to the current neatwork coverage deficit. That which is currently proposed is considered to represent the optimum solution within this sensitive rural location. The size of the mast dictates the coverage that will be achieved. A mast lower in height would result in the need for an additional mast or masts to achieve the line of sight

24 necessary. It is contended that the character and appearance of the natural environment will not be unduly harmed and the proposal will not result in the loss of any landscape features. Indeed, they are used to their advantage. Any perceived negative impacts are far outweighed by the benefits to the community and the 3ES. It is therefore contended that the characteristics of the National Park will be adequately conserved. The justification for the development is significant, providing an essential function for the 3ES.

GSP3: Development management principles

All development must conform to the following principles: Development must respect, conserve and enhance all valued characteristics of the site and buildings that are subject to the development proposal. Particular attention will be paid to: A. impact on the character and setting of buildings B. scale of development appropriate to the character and appearance of the National Park C. siting, landscaping and building materials D. design in accordance with the National Park Authority Design Guide E. form and intensity of proposed use or activity F. impact on living conditions of communities G. impact on access and traffic levels H. use of sustainable modes of transport I. use of sustainable building techniques J. ground conditions including any land instability from former mining, quarrying or industrial uses K. adapting to and mitigating the impact of climate change, particularly in respect of carbon emissions, energy and water demand”

The proposed development is to be sited within a rural context, with natural landscape as its backdrop. Within the constraints of the topography of the area, the desired network improvements sought and the surrounding land designations it is considered that the proposed mast will be assimilated into its environment without causing any undue harm. Telecommunications equipment is location dependent and the nominated site is considered to have the least potential impact on the locality generally. Many other sites and solutions were discounted in favour of the nominated option for the reasons specified above. There are no alternative solutions to that proposed which would have lesser impact on the locality. The provision of network coverage for the 3ES is imperative and is considered to represent a reason of overriding public interest in favour of allowing the proposed development.

The proposed development is small in scale, suitably camouflaged and the design is appropriate to the character and appearance of the National Park. Similar features exist within the immediate area and the mast has been specifically sited close to nearby high level trees to provide context and a backdrop. Furthermore, appropriate camouflage techniques have been employed to help the mast to be easily assimilated into this rural environment. The mast will provide an essential

25 service for the Emergency Services which will also benefit local residents, the community and visitors to the area. It will not result in an increase in traffic. Access is provided in the most sympathetic way possible avoiding conflict with nearby trees and upgrading an existing access track to make it safe for the necessary vehicles requiring access to the site. Suitable building techniques will be employed which will avoid causing any local environmental conflict and the ground conditions are appropriate for the form of development proposed. Impact on climate change is not relevant in this instance as the proposal will not result in carbon emissions or water demand. An on-site generator will not be required in this instance, however, the plans indicate an area to the East of the proposed compound where a tow to site generator could be located. Improved telecommunications facilities can reduce the need to travel thereby contributing to sustainable development principles.

“8.3 The vision will be achieved by realising the following outcomes in ways which help secure national park purposes.

Landscapes and conservation

The valued characteristics and landscape character of the National Park will be conserved and enhanced.

L1: Landscape character and valued characteristics

A. Development must conserve and enhance valued landscape character, as identified in the Landscape Strategy and Action Plan, and other valued characteristics. B. Other than in exceptional circumstances, proposals for development in the Natural Zone will not be permitted”

Whilst a site has been chosen within the National Park, it is well away from residential properties and outside more sensitive locations surrounding the site. Accordingly, within the relevant parameters the least sensitive site has been chosen. A mast lower in height or in an alternative position would result in the need for an additional mast in order to provide the required coverage, as line of site would not be achieved. It is therefore considered that the overall impact on the local environment would be greater than with the single mast proposed.

Full account has been taken of the surrounding landscape characteristics. Indeed nearby landscape features are used to their advantage. Appropriate camouflage techniques have been employed and the form of the mast is designed to reflect existing features in the surrounding environment in the form of telegraph poles. A backdrop of trees rising to a height of 20m will provide a suitable backdrop and context for the proposal ensuring that it will be easily assimilated into the environment. All low level equipment is to have a green painted finish in order to blend in with its green backdrop. In all these circumstances it is concluded that the proposed development conserves the valued landscape characteristics and landscape character of the National Park as far as it is able to. Any perceived negative impacts are far outweighed by the overall benefits of the scheme. The

26

proposed development is considered to provide the optimum solution to the existing coverage gaps in this instance. The mast will provide essential services to the ESN which will benefit local residents, the community and visitors to the area.

CONCLUSION

There is a requirement for EE to provide advanced telecommunications technologies to this rural area. Network planners have identified a need for an installation and the proposed development will address this identified need and continued customer demands.

National planning policy is to facilitate the growth of new and existing telecommunications systems, and operators have obligations to meet customer demands for improved quality of service. This application explains the technical need for the installation to provide improved customer service.

In terms of siting and design, it is considered that the proposal responds positively to the character and appearance of the local environment and will not have an unacceptable adverse impact on the application site or the surrounding area. The design is of a high standard, and will not detract significantly from the existing visual and environmental character of the area. The benefits to residents and visitors to the area far outweigh any potential perceived negative impacts and the proposal will provide an essential service for the 3ES. In all these circumstances it is concluded that there no policy or other objections that would warrant the refusal of planning permission and accordingly permission should be granted for the proposed development.

Contact Details

Name Andrew Bramall Telephone 01582 966909 (agent) PHA Communications 07931 966 986 Ltd. Operators EE (UK) Ltd Fax no N/a

Address 1, Waterside Email Andrew.bramall@phacomm Station Road address s.com Harpenden Herts AL5 4US

Signed Andrew Bramall Date 22nd May 2017 Position Surveyor Company For and on behalf EE (UK) Ltd

27