Plan: I DC/02/00593/FUL Eastbrook Ward (A)

Address: YMCA, Rush Green Road,

Development: Amended Application: Proposed installation of 10 no. transmission dishes having a diameter of 0.3m and 0.6m along with the installation of an associated equipment cabinet

Applicant: Hutchison 3G UK Ltd

Introduction and Description of Development

The application site is the 11 storey YMCA hostel building which is situated on the south side of Rush Green Road, Romford, close to Roneo Corner with the site straddling the Borough boundary with the Borough of Havering. Abutting the site to the west are residential properties in Rush Green Road and Gorseway, whilst to the south and east is public open space, which is separated from the application site by the .

Planning permission was refused on 9 April 2002 for the installation of 12 microwave telecommunications dishes on the roof of the building and a copy of the officer’s report is attached as an appendix to this report.

The current application is a resubmission and seeks consent for the placement of 10 transmission dishes with a diameter of either 0.3m and 0.6m at various location on the roof of the building along with an equipment cabinet measuring 2.6m by 2.6m with a height of 2.8m. This would match the dimensions of an approved Orange cabinet located in the southern part of the rooftop.

Whilst most telecommunications equipment provide cellular coverage this is not the purpose of this proposal. The proposed equipment is required so as to act as a link sending and receiving signals between 10 different base stations in the surrounding area of Romford, Hornchurch, , Barking and .

Background

Permission has already been granted in 1995, 1997 and 1998 for the erection of telecommunications equipment on the roof of the YMCA, including a 7.5 metre high monopole (TP/366/98).

Consultations a) Adjoining Occupiers

The occupiers of 34 adjoining residential properties were consulted and as a result 8 letters were received objecting to the proposal on the ground of health and safety (particularly in light of the number of children using the building and the adjacent playing fields), the impact of the development on property prices, that the development would be an eyesore and out of character to the surrounding area, that there is no assurance that ICNIRP standards will be complied with and that resident’s Human Rights may be infringed if consent is granted.

b) The London Borough of Havering

Officer response received raising no objection to the proposal.

UDP Policy

Policy DE.45 (Appendix 17) Telecommunications

No policy Issue.

Analysis

Policy DE.45 states that the Council will normally grant permission for the installation of telecommunications equipment provided there is a need for the development and that the equipment installed is the smallest available. Policy also encourages the installation of equipment on the roofs of buildings over 15m in height provided there is no adverse effect on the skyline and that the developer shows that there is no reasonable possibility of sharing existing facilities.

The justification for this is that the Council accepts that modern telecommunications are an essential and beneficial element in the local community and the national economy. To this end, the Council recognises the need to facilitate the continued growth of telecommunications. It is accepted though that any telecommunications development should always seek to be of a minimal visual impact so as to ensure that the appearance of buildings, the townscape and the countryside do not suffer adverse visual intrusion.

Members are advised that at present approximately two thirds of the national population currently own and use a mobile phone. In light of this and on the grounds of the type of equipment to be installed, as explained earlier in this report, it is considered that there is a need for the proposed development and that it will assist in the creation of a modern and reliable telecommunications system.

In respect of the size of the equipment and its impact on the visual appearance of the building it is important to judge the development in light of the existing equipment already in situ and the height of the YMCA building. At present both One 2 One and Orange have already positioned a range of equipment including panel antennae, dishes and equipment cabinets on the rooftop. The highest part of this existing equipment is 42.8m above ground level, which is approximately 9m above the highest part of the proposed dishes, which would only have a diameter of 300mm and 600mm respectfully. Given this backdrop of existing equipment, the size of the equipment and the overall height of the YMCA it is considered that the visual impact of the proposed equipment would be minimal and would not appear as obtrusive or dominant in the local street scene.

As to the use of the YMCA there are a limited number of suitable tall buildings within the immediate area. The applicant did enquire about utilising other buildings notably North House on St. Edward’s Way and Lambourne House, but the owners of the properties were unwilling to accommodate Hutchison’s equipment. However, by using the YMCA the applicant is utilising an existing site, which is consistent with the requirements of policy DE.45.

With regard to the objections raised on the grounds of health and safety Members are aware that Central Government commissioned the Stewart Report to investigate the possible public health risk associated with telecommunication base stations and hand held sets.

In the report’s summary and recommendation confirmation was given that in respect of exposure to radiation emissions:

“For base stations, exposures of the general population will be to the whole body, but normally at levels of intensity many times less than those from handsets.”

The report then confirms that whilst there is scientific evidence which suggests that there may be biological effects as a result of the above this does not mean that these effects lead to disease or injury. As a consequence whilst the report advises that a precautionary approach be followed until detailed and scientifically robust information on any health effect becomes available, it states that at present:

“We conclude that the balance of evidence indicates that there is no general risk to the health of people living near to base stations on the basis that exposures are expected to be small fractions of guidelines.”

In light of this, revised Government guidance in the form of Planning Policy Guidance Note 8 (Telecommunications) was published in August 2001. This states that health considerations and public concern can, in principle, be a material consideration in determining applications for planning permission. In deciding what weight to attached to these concerns Local Authorities are advised to take into account the advice outlined within the Stewart Report.

PPG8 though also clearly states that it is the Governments view that provided the equipment installed meets the guidelines required by the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), then Local Planning Authorities should not consider further health aspects and concerns about them.

Consequently as a matter of planning policy the Local Planning Authority should not generally give much weight to health concerns when considering applications for telecommunications equipment where the ICNIRP guidelines have been satisfied as is the case with this proposal. Subsequently whilst the objections raised are understandable, they cannot be supported when making a decision.

As to the impact of the proposal on property values, this is not considered to be a material consideration, which can be taken into consideration when making a decision. Even so due to the height of the building and the level and size of existing equipment on the roof the addition of 10 dishes 300mm and 600mm in diameter would not be particularly noticeable to potential purchasers.

The applicant has confirmed that the equipment will comply with the ICNIRP standards and it is normal procedure to attach a condition on any consent granted that the equipment always operates within these guidelines. As to the taking of regular readings to ensure that the equipment is operating within the specified guidelines, whilst in an ideal world this would be possible, due to the cost and the limited level of resources available to the Council it is unlikely that this can be achieved.

With regard to the impact of the development on individuals Human Rights this is considered a separate issue outside the remit of the Planning Acts and cannot be considered as a material consideration.

Overall it is considered that because of the size of the dishes to be installed in relation to the existing equipment present and their location that the proposed development is acceptable and for the reasons outlined above the objections raised are not of sufficient weight to warrant refusal in this instance.

Recommendation

That planning permission be granted subject to the following condition:

1. The mobile base station will operate in accordance with the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) RF exposure guidelines as expressed in the European Union Council Recommendation of 12 July 1999 on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields.