Agenda item

Refusal

Public Speaker

Mr Shamash (supporting)

The Senior Planning Officer (JS) presented the report and displayed plans and photographs of the site, including views from the surrounding area.  She recommended approval subject to the conditions listed in the report.

The Chairman referred to the comments of Councillor Ms K Ward, the local Member, which had been circulated prior to the meeting.  Members confirmed that they had read the comments.

Councillor Mrs A Fitch-Tillett stated that she was Vice-Chair of the Norfolk Coast Partnership.  She stated that the masts were in a sensitive location and asked if it would be possible to share the apparatus within the tower of Blakeney Church.  There was a suggestion through central government to make operators share apparatus.  She did not support this application.

Councillor N Pearce stated that the Local Authority was tasked with protecting the AONB and heritage, and questioned the need for a second mast on the site.  He considered that insufficient thought had been given to the siting of the mast at the outset.  He did not support the application.

The Head of Planning explained that the existing monopole had planning permission to be on the site.  The second mast also had planning permission, subject to the removal of the original mast.  He advised that in the event of refusal of this application, which sought to retain both masts, it would be necessary to consider enforcing either the condition relating to the brown mast or to have the brown mast removed.

Councillor R Kershaw stated that the issue seemed to be that one mast was acceptable and one should be removed.  The contractor had made a basic error in placing the 15m mast where there was no clear line of sight and he did not understand why the 12.5m mast could not be replaced by a 15m mast.  He understood that the equipment within Blakeney Church tower had recently gone live.  There would be a community benefit by bringing money into local churches and he understood alternative sites at Wiveton and Cley churches had not been explored.

There being no proposer for the Officers’ recommendation, the Chairman put the recommendation to the Committee and it was lost with no Members voting in favour.

Councillor Mrs A Fitch-Tillett proposed refusal of this application on grounds relating to additional harm to the AONB.

The Head of Planning advised the Committee with regard to identification of the level of harm and weighting against the public benefit.  He stated that he had delegated authority on matters of enforcement and would seek the retention of one of the masts and full compliance with one of the planning permissions which were in place.

It was proposed by Councillor Mrs A Fitch-Tillett, seconded by Councillor R Kershaw and

RESOLVED unanimously

That this application be refused on grounds that the harm to the AONB, Glaven Valley Conservation Area and the impact on the setting of the adjacent Conservation Area is not outweighed by the wider public benefit which arises from the proposal.