COOMBE LEA, GRAND AVENUE, HOVE, EAST SUSSEX, BN3 2NE National Grid N 529019, Reference: E 104608 Site Ref Number: 79854 Site Type:1 Macro

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

1. Site Details

Site Name: Coombe Lea RT Site Address: COOMBE LEA, GRAND AVENUE, HOVE, EAST SUSSEX, BN3 2NE National Grid N 529019, Reference: E 104608 Site Ref Number: 79854 Site Type:1 Macro

2. Pre Application Check List

Site Selection (for New Sites only)

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:

Database not available. Other sources checked.

Were industry site databases checked for suitable sites by the Yes No operator: If no explain why:

N/A

Site Specific Pre-application consultation with local planning authority

Was there pre-application contact: No Date of pre-application contact: 08/01/2021 Name of contact: N/A

Summary of outcome/Main issues raised:

A consultation letter, associated plans and proposed consultation plan were sent to Brighton and Hove City Council on 08/01/2021. A consultation response had not been received at the time of writing. Lines of communication will remain open throughout the application process.

Community Consultation

Rating of Site under Traffic Light Model: Red Amber Green

Outline of consultation carried out:

The proposal was rated Amber in accordance with the traffic light consultation model in the Code of Best Practice on Mobile Network Development (published 2016). The pre-application consultation plan adhered to best practice guidance.

Pre-application consultation was undertaken with the Council Members for the Ward in which site is located and with the residents of Coombe Lea (84No. apartments). A consultation letter and supporting information was posted or emailed to the consultees on 08/01/2021.

1 Macro or Micro

Summary of outcome/main issues raised (include copies of relevant correspondence):

Out of the 84No. resident letters sent out, 5No. residents responded to the consultation. The responses received raised various concerns about the proposal and specifically requested additional information on matters that included design, site selection and health. This supplementary statement aims to address the matters that are relevant to determination of the planning application.

School/College

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

The site is not located near to any educational facilities. As such, there were no relevant bodies to consult.

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

N/A

Summary of outcome/main issues raised (include copies of main correspondence):

N/A

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

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

N/A – applies to applications for Prior Approval.

Developer’s Notice

Copy of Developer’s Notice enclosed? Yes No Date served: 20/01/2021

3. Proposed Development

The proposed site:

3.1 The application site is located on the rooftop a building named Coombe Lea which is located on Grand Avenue. The multi-storey rectangular-shaped building is approximately 32m high and in use as a residential apartment block. The building has a traditional brick material finish with a single main roof-level and two plant room structures that sit above the main-level. The building has various protrusions and recesses formed by balconies. The building has associated landscaped grounds and ground-level carpark in front of the east elevation, fronting Grand Avenue.

3.2 The host building forms one of several high-rise apartment blocks located on Grand Avenue. The buildings are similar in form, scale and general appearance. The wider area is predominantly characterised by dense patterns of multi-storey buildings, often in residential use. Church Road is situated a shorth distance to the north of the site with its various retail and financial services of the type typically found on a high street. Hove Beach is approximately 300m to the south of the site.

Figure 1. Aerial view of application site (denoted approximately) and local context. Map source: Google.

Enclose map showing the cell centre and adjoining cells if appropriate:

Network information is provided separately within this application.

Type of Structure (e.g. tower, mast, etc):

Description:

Installation of 6No. antenna apertures across 3No. steel support structures, 3No. 600mm wide dishes and 8No. equipment cabinets all at roof-level, 1No. cabinet at ground-level, plus ancillary works.

Ancillary apparatus includes steelwork, fixings and supporting electrical equipment. Please refer to submitted plans for full details.

Equipment housing cabinets

3No. Outdoor cabinets (770x770x2100mm) 1No. H3G AMP5930 cabinet (640x600x2165mm) 1No. EE AMP5930 cabinet (640x480x1200mm) 1No. Furo cabinet (775x600x2100mm) 1No. Link AC cabinet (1200x600x1800mm) 1No. 3900A (600X480X1600mm) 1No. Meter cabinet at ground-level (1100x400x1200mm)

Overall Height: 36m approx. (top of highest proposed structure) Height of existing building (where applicable): 33.20m approx. (highest part) Equipment Housing: See above section Length: Width: Height: Materials (as applicable): Tower/mast etc – type of material and external Antennas & dishes – white/light grey, made from plastic & colour: steel Support structures – galvanised-steel

Equipment housing – type of material and external Cabinets to be coloured light grey or green. colour:

Reasons for choice of design, making reference to pre-application responses:

Antennas, dishes & supports

3.3 The equipment layout and design are based on the principle of meeting operational requirements of the mobile operators Everything Everywhere (EE) and Three, whilst minimising impact on the appearance of the host building and its surroundings, as far as technical constraints allow.

3.4 The base-station has been designed to accommodate replacement apparatus, allowing provision of 2G, 3G and 4G mobile connections to the surrounding area to continue. It has also been designed to accommodate new 5G technology, introducing ultra-fast mobile connectivity capable of operating the ‘Internet of Things’. This upgraded and replacement infrastructure will provide higher mobile down-load speeds and more reliable, quicker phone connections. There would be increased capacity to provide services to a higher number of people at the same time.

3.5 The number and scale of proposed antennas/dishes is informed by the number of communication services being provided (4G, 5G etc.); the fact that the base-station will be multi-operator meaning that both EE and Three require apparatus; and because of the high technical capability of 5G services.

3.6 The antennas must be allowed to unrestrictedly emit a radio signal, meaning they need to be sited at an elevated position at the edge of the rooftop to enable the radio signal to clear surrounding structures, such as buildings and trees, with the aim of avoiding interference. The radio frequencies that 5G operates at is particularly sensitive to interference from solid objects, which necessitates securing the antennas to elevated steel support frames at the height proposed.

3.7 The layout of the antennas is informed by physical constraints of the rooftop and local area, and the outcome of software modelling which positions the antennas in such a way that they collectively provide 360-degree coverage to the surrounding area. Similarly, the dishes must connect to other base-stations in the wider network by microwave link. As such, they require ‘line of sight’ which an unobstructed path to neighbouring base- stations.

3.8 The aforementioned factors have informed the design of the proposed equipment which is of the minimum amount and scale possible, while still meeting structural and radio planning requirements.

Equipment cabinets

3.9 The antennas must connect to the proposed equipment housing cabinets by electrical cable feeders. The equipment cabinets, an essential component of the base-station, must be located as close to the antennas as possible in order to minimise electrical power losses during operation.

3.10 The central rooftop location and scale of the proposed cabinets, in the context of the host building, means that they are unlikely to be visible from ground-level.

Figure 2. Photograph of host building from Grand Avenue (a)

Figure 3. Photograph of host building from Grand Avenue (b) – existing equipment cabinets at street-level

Figure 4. Photograph of host building’s rooftop, showing plant room buildings.

Figure 5. Photograph of host building’s rooftop, antenna support structures to be behind existing railing

Figure 6. 3D image showing approximate layout of proposed antenna clusters. Map source: Google.

Technical Information

Yes No International Commission on Non-Ionizing 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 and Three operate their 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 and Three’s networks, 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 which is 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.

4. Technical Justification

Reason(s) why site required e.g. coverage, upgrade, capacity

Replacement coverage

4.1 The principle aim of the proposal is to replace communications coverage from a base-station which was decommissioned. Everything Everywhere (EE) and Three – two of the major licenced mobile operators in the UK – originally provided communication services from the rooftop of Bath Court, 8 Kings Esplanade, Hove, Brighton & Hove, BN3 2WA. The base-station was decommissioned because new surrounding development, higher-level than Bath Court, blocked the radio signal and therefore consequently impacted the ability of the base-station to operate effectively.

4.2 The proposal is required in order to allow full replacement coverage of 2G, 3G and 4G mobile services to the surrounding area, when implemented alongside other network modifications. The consequence of not doing so is that users of the networks may find that the services they previously had access to are either limited or removed. The provision of poor communication services has well recognised economic and social impacts on communities and businesses.

Enhanced services

4.3 The base-station would also provide new 5G services, introducing ultra-fast mobile connectivity capable of operating the ‘Internet of Things’. This upgraded and replacement infrastructure will provide higher mobile down- load speeds and more reliable, quicker phone connections.

4.4 Importantly, the base-station would provide increased network capacity, allowing quality service provision to a higher number of people at the same time. Improving cellular connectivity is led largely by demand. The very high level of mobile phone use in the UK requires the installation of additional/upgraded base stations to provide the necessary connections.

4.5 Ofcom’s 2018 Communications Market Research Report shows that smartphones are owned by four of every five UK consumers. While take-up of fixed broadband has plateaued at 80%, accessing the internet on a mobile phone continues to grow, from 66% in 2017 to 72% in 2018. Demand for data continues to grow rapidly for UK consumers, with 1.9GB consumed by an average mobile subscription per month in 2017, (up from 1.3 GB the previous year). The report found that more than seven in ten now use their mobile to access the internet.

4.6 Ofcom’s Connected Nations 2020 UK report explains the important role of Mobile Networks Operators (MNO’s) such as EE and Three:

“We expect MNOs to leverage other benefits of 5G as they continue to rollout their networks and to provide connectivity solutions for both consumers and businesses. This includes private networks for businesses, which will facilitate greater control and privacy in addition to connectivity.

5G will continue to target a range of other applications (e.g. manufacturing, logistics, agriculture, automotive, energy, media & entertainment and healthcare sectors) to deliver benefits to consumers, businesses and organisations. 5G (3GPP Release 16 & 17) has features such as near instantaneous network response (a latency of only a few milliseconds) and high reliability which are key enablers for these applications” (p 37)

4.7 In addition, EE (UK) Ltd will be supporting the communications requirements of Emergency Services where further rollout and improvements in the 4G signal is currently being progressed.

5. Site Selection Process

5.1 In accordance with planning policy, a sequential approach to site selection was adopted. The opportunity to site apparatus onto an existing structure was given preference over installation of a ground-based mast. The need to replace an existing cell within the network, means that coverage could not be replaced by installing apparatus at an existing communications site.

5.2 The application site was selected following a thorough search and detailed investigations. The decision factored multiple considerations, including:

 location in relation to the base-station it will replace;  future redevelopment plans in the local area;  design of the building, including height and roof-design;  ability to acquire roof-space;  physical access to build/maintain the base-station;  potential for neighbouring buildings & trees to obstruct radio signal;  minimising environmental impact, including protecting heritage assets.

5.3 Site location is critical in network planning and becomes even more so when there is need to replace an existing base station already operating within the established cellular pattern. When an existing site is lost, it leaves a very specific and unique gap in the network. This gap needs to be re-filled if users living and working within in area are to be able to continue to use their mobile phones and other wireless devices. This places even greater limitations on the potential siting opportunities, as many locations will not enable this specific gap to be adequately filled. The application site’s location in relation the site which must be replaced will, in conjunction with other proposed base- stations, enable coverage to be suitably replaced.

5.4 The design of a host building is also key. The building serves as an elevated platform from which radio coverage is provided to the surrounding area, as such the building must be sufficiently high to enable the radio waves to clear surrounding structures and reach the targeted areas. Likewise, the roof-top of the building must meet design parameters with respect to having the available space to accommodate the equipment, a flat roof design, and the structural strength. The application site was found to be suitable with consideration to these criteria.

Figure 7. Photo from application site showing that radio signal can clear surrounding structures, providing effective mobile phone signal to a densely populated area with high demand for mobile services.

Figure 8. Photo from application site… as described under previous figure

Alternative sites considered and not chosen:

Figure 9. Application site (C1) in relation to alternative sites considered (see table below also).

Site Type Site name and address Reason for not choosing site Rooftop (C2) Ashley Court, Grand Avenue, These buildings are of similar design to the application site so Hove BN3 2NL were given consideration to host the proposal. The location of Rooftop (C3) the application site was found to be preferable with respect to 1 Grand Avenue, Hove its proximity to the area which requires radio coverage and BN3 2LA additional network capacity. The application site’s closer proximity to Church Road, where there is a high concentration (1) of businesses and shoppers etc, and consequently a high Warnham Court, Grand demand on the network for mobile services, was a contributing Avenue, Hove BN3 2NJ factor.

Additionally, Victoria Court (site No.2) features rooftop garden Rooftop space which would reduce the amount of space available for Rooftop (2) communications equipment and potentially causing site Victoria Court, 16 Grand access issues. Avenue, Hove BN3 2NH No. 4 Grand Avenue (site No.4) is a listed building, meaning Rooftop (3) that installing equipment onto the building would result in 15 Grand Avenue, Hove BN3 greater potential for harm to a heritage asset, relative to the 2NG proposal at the application site.

Rooftop (4) 4 Grand Avenue, Hove BN3 2LD

Rooftop (5) This building features rooftop garden space which would Viceroy Lodge, 143 reduce the amount of space available for communications Kingsway, Hove BN3 4RA equipment and potentially causing site access/maintenance issues.

Rooftop (6) The location of the building is less preferable with respect to Flag Court, Courtenay meeting radio planning requirements. This factors Terrace, Hove BN3 2WG considerations such as the need for the base-station to integrate into the Operators’ established radio network patterns in the wider area, and the need to provide coverage/capacity to the area where it is needed.

Furthermore, the building is in a more visually prominent location next to the promenade and beach, meaning the proposed equipment would be more visible, and visible to a higher number of people.

Rooftop (7) Siting apparatus onto the rooftop of one of these buildings Lancaster Court, Kingsway, would not meet radio planning requirements. Specifically, the Hove BN3 2TQ buildings are too low to provide sufficient antenna height for effective operations. This factors the need for the radio signal to not be “blocked” by surrounding higher-level buildings. The Rooftop (8) application site Coombe Lea is one such building which would Albany Towers, St block the radio signal if equipment was to be sited onto one of Catherines Terrace, Hove the lower-level buildings in the surrounding area. BN3 2RQ Furthermore, The Priory (site No. 9) features rooftop garden space which would reduce the amount of space available for Rooftop (9) communications equipment and potentially causing site The Priory, Medina Villas, access/maintenance issues. Hove BN3 2RQ

Additionally, Oliver House (site No. 11) has a pitched roof design which would not meet rooftop selection criteria with Rooftop (10) respect to the need for a flat rooftop design that is high-level, Courtney Gate, Hove structurally sound and which provides a feasible solution to BN3 2WJ affix and operated apparatus from.

Rooftop (11) Oliver House, 5-7 Fourth Avenue, Hove BN3 2BH

Rooftop (12) Princess Court, Princess Avenue, Hove BN3 4GT

Rooftop (13) Bluebird Court, 12-14 Hove Street, Hove BN3 2TU

Rooftop (14) The design of this rooftop is such that there is insufficient The Mirage, Vallance space to accommodate all the proposed equipment which is Gardens, Hove BN3 2DB required to form the shared base-station (both EE & Three’s equipment).

Rooftop (15) This was the building that originally hosted the base-station Bath Court, 8 Kings and from which apparatus was removed. The building is now Esplanade, Hove BN3 2WA overshadowed by a higher-level new build development which would block the radio signal and render the base-station ineffective.

Rooftop (16) The location of these buildings is unsuitable with respect to Blenheim Court, Kings meeting radio planning requirements. This factors Esplanade, Hove BN3 2WR considerations such as the need for the base-station to integrate into the Operators’ established radio network patterns in the wider area, and the need to provide Rooftop (17) coverage/capacity to the area where it is needed. Spa Court, Kings Esplanade, Hove BN3 2WS Furthermore, the buildings are in a more visually prominent location next to the promenade and beach, meaning the proposed equipment would be more visible, and visible to a higher number of people.

Rooftop (18) Siting apparatus onto the rooftop of one of these buildings Windsor Lodge, Third would not meet radio planning requirements. Specifically, the Avenue, Hove BN3 2PD buildings are too low to provide sufficient antenna height for effective operations. This factors the need for the radio signal to not be “blocked” by surrounding higher-level buildings. The Rooftop (19) application site Coombe Lea is one such building which would Tesco, Church Road, Hove block the radio signal if equipment was to be sited onto one of BN3 3JZ the lower-level buildings in the surrounding area.

The Tesco building (site No. 19) is in the setting of the grade II* listed Church of St Andrew, meaning that installing Rooftop (20) Church Road DNS, equipment onto site No.19 would result in greater potential for Hove BN3 harm to a heritage asset, relative to the proposal at the application site.

Rooftop (21) The location of these buildings is unsuitable with respect to Marlborough Court, The meeting radio planning requirements. This factors Drive, Hove BN3 3LE- considerations such the need for the base-station to integrate into the Operators’ established radio network patterns in the wider area, and the need to provide coverage/capacity to the Rooftop (22) Gainsborough House, area where it is needed. 4-6 Eaton Gardens, Hove BN3 3UA

Additional relevant information (include planning policy and material considerations):

Heritage Statement

The Heritage Assets

6.1 The host building is inside The Avenues Conservation Area, designated as an area of special architectural or historic interest whose character and appearance is to be preserved or enhanced. The host building is not nationally listed for its historic significance.

Figure 10. Application site (red arrow) in relation to The Avenues Conservation Area boundary. Map Source: Brighton & Hove C.C

6.2 The Avenues Conservation Area Character Statement, published by Brighton and Hove City Council, summaries the significance of the historic asset:

“Architecturally, the Avenues include a variety of styles due to the changes of taste that took place during the slow pace of development. In general the character and appearance of the area which it is important to preserve or enhance, is of 3 and 4 storey terraced or semi-detached properties, mostly yellow brick with slate roofs (eg First and Second Avenue), but with groups of properties of red brick and tile. Fancy brickwork, bays, balconies and canopies feature strongly, and boundaries are marked by low walls, mostly with railings and also by stone balustrading. Entrance paths are often of tiles. Most properties have solid panelled doors, timber sliding sash windows and large chimney stacks.

The mews are an integral and important part of the area's character, as are the many traditional shopfronts in Church Road. Individual buildings of interest include Hove's first block of flats - Grand Avenue Mansions built in 1883, the Seeboard Offices (originally The Princes Hotel) built in 1874, King's Gardens, and no's 4 and 5 Third Avenue. Throughout the area it is the homogenous character, the scale of the buildings and recurring architectural features and materials that need to be protected.”

6.3 The nearest nationally listed asset to the application site is the Hove Memorial (grade II, UID 1187556). The location of application site in relation to memorial is denoted below. The Historic England list entry describes the significance of the asset:

“Hove War Memorial is listed at Grade II for the following principle reasons: * Historic interest: as an eloquent witness to the tragic impacts of world events on this community, and the sacrifices it made in the conflicts of the C20; * Architect: by the nationally renowned architect Sir Edwin Landseer Lutyens (1869-1944), who designed extant 58 memorials at home and abroad including the Cenotaph in Whitehall; * Design: a rare Doric column memorial by Lutyens; * Sculptural interest: the column is surmounted by a bronze statue of St George by Sir George Frampton RA; * Group value: with several listed building on the east side of Grand Avenue.”

Figure 11. Application site (red arrow) in relation to nearest listed asset (blue arrow) & other listed assets. Map Source: Historic England.

Heritage Planning Policy

6.4 When determining planning applications that affect heritage assets, the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) (NPPF) advises that local authorities should take account of:

‘a) the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation;

b) the positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainable communities including their economic vitality…’ (para. 192)

‘Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use.’ (para. 196)

‘Not all elements of a Conservation Area or World Heritage Site will necessarily contribute to its significance.’ (para. 201)

6.5 The local authority’s Development Plan contains the following policies relevant to heritage:

I POLICY CP15 - HERIATGE

“The council will work with partners to promote the city’s heritage and to ensure that the historic environment plays an integral part in the wider social, cultural, economic and environmental future of the city through the following aims:

1. The city’s historic environment will be conserved and enhanced in accordance with its identified significance, giving the greatest weight to designated heritage assets and their settings and prioritising positive action for those assets at risk through, neglect, decay, vacancy or other threats. The council will further ensure that the city’s built heritage guides local distinctiveness for new development in historic areas and heritage settings;

2. Where proposals are promoted for their contribution to mitigating climate change, the public benefit of this will be weighed against any harm which may be caused to the significance of the heritage asset or its setting” (Brighton and Hove City Plan Part One, adopted 2016) (emphasis added)

I POLICY HE6 - DEVELOPMENT WITHIN OR AFFECTING THE SETTING OF CONSERVATION AREAS

“Proposals within or affecting the setting of a conservation area should preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the area and should show:

a. a consistently high standard of design and detailing reflecting the scale and character or appearance of the area, including the layout of the streets, development patterns, building lines and building forms; b. the use of building materials and finishes which are sympathetic to the area; c. no harmful impact on the townscape and roofscape of the conservation area; d. the retention and protection of trees, gardens, spaces between buildings, and other open areas which contribute to the character or appearance of the area; e. where appropriate, the removal of unsightly and inappropriate features or details; and f. the retention and, where appropriate, the reinstatement of original features such as chimneys, chimney pots, gates, railings and shopfronts and small scale architectural details such as mouldings which individually or cumulatively contribute to the character or appearance of the area.

Proposals that are likely to have an adverse impact on the character or appearance of a conservation area will not be permitted.” (Brighton & Hove Local Plan 2005)

Heritage Impact Assessment

6.6 In considering the development proposal, a key consideration is the balance of preserving heritage assets while also enabling the economic growth and social needs of Hove to be suitably served by quality electronic communication services.

6.7 A key principle is that the buildings which have been identified as being suitable for accommodating the base-station, with particular consideration to their elevated height above surrounding structures, as well as their compatible roof-top design and suitable location, are all inside the conservation area. Therefore, in order to provide fully-effective mobile coverage to Hove and meet the high-level of demand for services on two of the UK’s major mobile networks – EE and Three – it has been found necessary to install rooftop equipment inside the designated area.

6.8 Importantly, the antennas are split into 3No. clusters (2No. antenna apertures per cluster) with each cluster located at a different part of the building. This avoids need for a single large-scale support structure, accommodating all antennas and dishes, which would appear incongruous. The view towards the building from Grand Avenue is considered the most sensitive to change and the fact that only a single antenna cluster would be located at that elevation, notably reduces the effect on the appearance of the building.

6.9 The proposed apparatus would be installed onto the rooftop of a large-scale multi-storey building located in a dense urban context. The apparatus would be located approximately 30m above ground-level on one of the highest buildings in the town, thereby outside of the eyeline view experienced by pedestrians at street- level.

6.10 It is material that the host building is set back from the public highway and set back from the building-line formed by the row of high-rise apartment blocks on Grand Avenue, thereby reducing the prominence of the building’s roofline. The presence of roadside tree planting on Grand Avenue would also serve to screen or filter some views of the equipment.

6.11 It is considered that the amount, layout and scale of apparatus, relative the scale of the building, is proportionate. The antennas would be viewed against the background sky and as such would be coloured white/light grey to encourage their assimilation. The antennas could, however, be coloured a specific RAL colour to compliment the red brick of the host building if preferable. This could be agreed with the LPA.

6.12 The proposal could constitute ‘viable use’ of the building’s rooftop space consistent with conservation of the heritage asset, and as such this should be given weight in accordance with the NPPF (para. 192). Furthermore, while the mobile base-station is located inside the conservation area, it will also serve a high number of residents, businesses, and visitors that are inside the designated area; thereby enhancing the function of the conservation area and providing public benefits which include contributing to ‘sustainable communities’ and ‘economic vitality’. The proposal accords with paragraph 192 of the NPPF in this respect.

6.13 Policy CP15 of the Brighton and Hove City Plan Part 1 is also pertinent with respect to advice that “Where proposals are promoted for their contribution to mitigating climate change, the public benefit of this will be weighed against any harm”. The use of mobile communications for home working, shopping and banking, for example, makes an important contribution to reducing transport emissions associated with reduced journeys, which in turn contributes to climate change mitigation.

6.14 With respect to the setting of the listed war memorial, there would be a single cluster of antennas located at the elevation closest to the listed structure. The antennas would be a considerable height above street-level and outside of its immediate setting. The amount, scale and separation distance of the proposed apparatus should not greatly impact views from the memorial, and it should not impact views towards it. The proposal would not directly impact any of the asset’s features identified in the Historic England list entry.

6.15 It could reasonably be concluded that the proposal would lead to “less than substantial harm” (NPPF, para 196) to the conservation area and to the setting of listed buildings. As such and in accordance with the NPPF, the less than substantial harm must be weighed against the public benefits to the surrounding area which are considerable. Refer to Section 4, and proceeding sections of this report outlining national policy, for evidence of public benefits.

Wider Planning Policy

Development Plan

6.16 Section 70 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) requires planning applications and appeals to be determined having regard to the provisions of the Development Plan and other material considerations. Section 38 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires applications and appeals to be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

6.17 Relevant sections of the authority’s Development Plan come from the Brighton and Hove City Plan Part One (adopted 2016) and the Brighton & Hove Local Plan 2005. The proposal is to replace and improve communications infrastructure, making the following policies particularly relevant.

City Plan

I POLICY CP6 - INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS “To meet the needs of Brighton & Hove and the wider sub-region the council will work with partners to ensure that the necessary social, environmental and physical infrastructure is appropriately provided in time to serve the development.”

6.18 Planned economic and residential growth cannot be sustained without the provision of essential utilities infrastructure, including access to reliable, resilient and high-speed electronic communications. The proposal would replace and improve mobile services and increase the capacity of the network, enabling the high demand for calls, texts and data in the local area to be met.

Local Plan

I POLICY QD23 - TELECOMMUNICATIONS APPARATUS (GENERAL)

‘Proposals for telecommunication developments will only be permitted where the following criteria are met: a. subject to technical and operation considerations, the development is sited, designed, landscaped (where relevant) and in the most appropriate materials and colours, so as to minimise its visual impact; b. it can be demonstrated that existing masts, nearby buildings or structures cannot reasonably be used for the purpose; c. there will be no serious adverse effect on the character or appearance of the area; d. where the proposal determines the location of development elsewhere, details are submitted of the co-ordinated and strategic assessment, including the location of any subsequent apparatus, which demonstrates that the proposal is part of a plan that minimises the overall impact; and e. there would be no unacceptable adverse impact on amenity, people, landscape and nature conservation in the locality.

6.19 The proposal is considered complaint with Policy QD23. In particular, the siting and design is the best solution available, consistent with meeting technical and operational requirements. In a sequential approach to site selection, installation of equipment onto an existing building was selected over installing a ground- based mast. Whilst some of the proposed equipment would be visible in near views of the site, this is not considered to constitute “serious adverse effect” on the appearance of the local area. The proposed design and layout would not result in “unacceptable adverse impact on amenity”.

I POLICY QD24 - TELECOMMUNICATIONS APPARATUS AFFECTING IMPORTANT AREAS

“Proposals for telecommunication developments, such as masts or other structures, will not be permitted in locations where they would have an adverse affect on any of the following important areas or their settings… a conservation area…

Exceptions will only be made where all the following criteria can be met:

a. the proposal complies with Policy QD23 'Telecommunications Apparatus (General)' and other respective policies in the Development Plan; b. the design of the apparatus is the most suitable for the area / building and takes into account the area's / building's special importance; c. it is demonstrated that the proposal provides an essential link in a national and local network for which no alternatives exist and the adverse impacts are minimised; and d. a detailed visual impact assessment is provided and in the case of important wildlife sites, an ecological assessment is also provided, even when a formal Environmental Impact Assessment is not required.”

6.20 Similarly, the proposal adheres to the principles of Policy QD24. In particular, the layout of having a single antenna cluster at the front elevation of the building, and the use of lower-level support structures as oppose to a single larger-scale rooftop mast, is considered to be “most suitable for the area”. It has been demonstrated that the proposal forms an “essential link” in the networks of two licenced mobile operators, and an extensive list of alternative siting solutions has been explored (see Section 5).

National Policy

National Planning Policy Framework

6.21 The government sets out its national policy objectives for electronic communications in Section 10 ‘Supporting high quality communications’ of the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019) (NPPF):

‘Advanced, high quality and reliable communications infrastructure is essential for economic growth and social well-being. Planning policies and decisions should support the expansion of electronic communications networks, including next generation mobile technology (such as 5G) and full fibre broadband connections.’ (para. 112)

‘The number of radio and electronic communications masts, and the sites for such installations, should be kept to a minimum consistent with the needs of consumers, the efficient operation of the network and providing reasonable capacity for future expansion. Use of existing masts, buildings and other structures for new electronic communications capability (including wireless) should be encouraged.

UK Digital Strategy

6.22 The UK Digital Strategy, published by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport in March 2017, provides evidence of the public benefits of communication services:

‘Broadband and mobile must be treated as the fourth utility, with everyone benefiting from improved connectivity. This will play a crucial role in ensuring that everyone, wherever they live and however they connect, can make full use of digital services and benefit from participation in the digital economy. Improved connectivity also increases innovation and productivity across the economy, bringing significant economic rewards’

‘5G is the next generation of mobile connectivity, and is currently in development. It is expected to represent a significant upgrade: providing ultrafast, low latency, and more reliable mobile connectivity, able to handle our ever-increasing data requirements. This should present huge opportunities to boost productivity and grow the economy. In addition to giving consumers and business users high quality connectivity, it will also support the development of the Internet of Things: the rapidly-increasing number of connected devices, from connected cars to digital health applications.’

Future Telecoms Infrastructure Review

6.23 The Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport published its findings of the Government's Future Telecoms Infrastructure Review in 2018. The review highlights the important and far reaching role of 5G infrastructure:

‘Alongside finishing the roll out of 4G networks to meet existing mobile demand, we want the UK to be a world leader in 5G to take early advantage of this new technology. We have set a target that the majority of the population will have 5G coverage by 2027.’

‘The technical capabilities and performance characteristics of 5G are clear. 5G is expected to deliver faster and better mobile broadband services to consumers and businesses, and to enable innovative new services for industry sectors, including manufacturing, transport, immersive technologies and healthcare.’ (p 10)

Ofcom reports

6.24 Ofcom’s annual Communications Market Reports identified trends which demonstrate reliance on reliable mobile connections:

‘We all need high-quality communications. In the modern world, a huge amount of our time is spent using communications services: for work, to stay in touch with family and friends, and in order to go about our daily lives. Our ability to access and use reliable mobile and broadband connections has become fundamental to the way we work and live, and to the ability of businesses of all sizes to thrive. For many people, internet connectivity is now as essential as gas or electricity, and access to traditional television, radio, fixed phone lines and postal services continue to remain important.’ (2016 report)

Other Material Considerations

6.25 The following are examples of appeal decisions by the Planning Inspectorate where the Inspector awarded considerable weight to the public need for communications infrastructure, with respect to maintaining and improving network coverage/capacity, and with respect to the reliance on mobile communications during the Covid-19 pandemic. The proposal at the application site is required in order to meet the same objectives. The appeals listed below were all allowed.

6.26 Most of these cases relate to installation of ground-based masts located inside conservation areas, sited near to listed buildings. They have similar constraints to the application proposal.

1) APP/A1910/C/20/3256772 & APP/A1910/C/20/3256773 - Telefónica UK Limited Vs. Dacorum Borough Council (December 2020)

‘The reliance on telecommunications has been tested and heightened during the current Covid-19 pandemic with the whole country subject to lockdowns and various restrictions. This has meant people have been being advised to work remotely from home wherever possible; education at schools, colleges and universities has depended more on on-line teaching and learning; there has been increased dependency for shopping and medical and other appointments. There has also been increased use and dependency on accessing and using mobile devices for social interaction and staying connected with friends and family, especially important for those who have been shielding or who are self-isolating.

The government’s advice during the pandemic recognises that “Now, more than ever, the country is reliant on fixed line and mobile communications networks. And as a result, telecommunications has therefore been included as one of the critical sectors in new government regulations and legislation in response to dealing with the COVID-19 outbreak’

2) APP/V5570/W/20/3251047 - Telefonica UK Limited Vs. Council of the London Borough of Islington (November 2020)

‘there would be a considerable public benefit arising from the provision of improved digital communications networks in this busy commercial area, and I consider that this carries significant weight.’ In exploring the planning balance, the inspector found ‘the proposal would fail to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Bunhill Fields and Finsbury Square Conservation Area, and would cause less than substantial harm to the significance of the Conservation Area as a designated heritage asset.

In this respect I have also found conflict with planning policies, and indeed the proposal would conflict with the development plan as a whole’ and ‘However, I have also found that a significant public benefit would be delivered through the provision of improved mobile communications networks, which would outweigh the limited harm to the heritage asset which I have identified. The material considerations therefore indicate that, in this case, the proposal should be determined other than in accordance with the development plan.’

3) APP/Q3305/W/18/3206555 – Vodafone Vs. Mendip District Council

‘Government policy, as set out in the Framework states that advanced, high quality and reliable communications infrastructure is essential for economic growth and social well-being… I have found that there is a need for the proposal which therefore weighs strongly in its favour…. I conclude on this issue that despite the less than substantial harm that would be caused, the public benefits of the proposal would outweigh that harm.’

4) APP/M5450/W/17/3180345 - CTIL and Telefónica (O2) Vs. the London Borough of Hillingdon

‘The Framework sets out the importance of an advanced highquality communications infrastructure for sustainable growth and makes specific reference to the development of high speed broadband technology. This is reflected in the London Plan and the public benefit arising from the improvement of the telecommunications infrastructure is a material planning consideration that weighs in favour of the proposal. Taking account of all matters I have concluded that the limited harm caused to the significance of the heritage asset (the CA) would be outweighed by the public benefit that would arise from improving the communications infrastructure’.

Summary

6.27 The application seeks planning permission for proposed communications equipment to be installed at Coombe Lea, Grand Avenue. The principle aim of the proposal is to replace communications coverage from an operational base-station which was decommissioned. In addition to replacing coverage, the proposal will also result in improved communication services including by increasing the capacity of the network and by introducing 5G services.

6.28 Everything Everywhere (EE) and Three – two of the major licenced mobile operators in the UK – previously provided communication services from the rooftop of Bath Court, 8 Kings Esplanade, Hove, Brighton & Hove, BN3 2WA. The base-station had to be decommissioned due to reasons beyond the Operators’ control and consequently services have now ceased operating from the site.

6.29 The application site was found to be a suitable replacement building. The site location must enable the lost coverage to be suitably replaced; and out of the building options in the immediate area, the application site was found to be the most suitable option with consideration to its rooftop design, the antenna height that it would provide and with consideration to protecting the environment.

6.30 The equipment layout and design are based on the principle of meeting operational requirements of the mobile operators, whilst minimising landscape and visual impact as far as technical constraints allow. The proposal amounts to a change to the appearance of the host building to enable far reaching public benefits for the surrounding area. The Operators EE and Three would share the site, thereby minimising the number of structures required and associated sites.

6.31 The proposal would not only fully reinstate mobile coverage for as high number of residents, businesses and commuters in the surrounding area, it would also provide upgraded services. Modern communication services have evident social, economic and environmental implications. This includes the mobile’s role in providing social and digital inclusion to communities; economic competitiveness by serving businesses in the area; and supporting sustainability objectives such as enabling homeworking, reducing transport congestion and greenhouse gas emissions.

Contact

Name: (Agent) Mark Flaherty MRTPI, Telephone: 01932 411011 Waldon Telecom Operator: EE (UK) Ltd and Three (UK) Ltd Address: Email Address: [email protected] C/o Agent Date: 21/01/2021

Signed: Company: Waldon Telecom M. Flaherty

Position: Senior Planner (on behalf of MBNL Waldon Telecom (Agent) (EE Ltd and H3G UK 101 Phoenix House Ltd) and above Pyford Rd operator) West Byfleet KT14 6RA