Transport and the Environment Committee 3rd Report,
2000:
Report on inquiry into the proposals to introduce
new planning procedures for telecommunications developments
Response by the Scottish Executive
The Scottish Executive made an interim response to the Transport
and the Environment Committee's 3rd report on 9 May 2000.
Since then the Executive has also received the report of the Independent Expert
Group on Mobile Phones (IEGMP), the Stewart Report. This further response to
the Committee's 3rd report takes account of both the Stewart
report and the Parliamentary debate on telecommunications on 11 May.
This further response, in common with the Executive's interim
response, deals with the recommendations of the Committee's 3rd report
relating to:
-
introducing full planning control over a wide range of telecommunications
development that is currently permitted development and introducing a notification
procedure for permitted development;
-
encouraging telecommunications operators and planning authorities to discuss
future development intentions with a view to setting out criteria in development
plans to guide the location of telecommunications infrastructure and agreeing
suitable locations for masts and other equipment;
-
establishing and maintaining local authority registers of telecommunications
developments to maximise the extent to which masts and sites are shared
between operators and to provide a basis for systematic monitoring;
-
providing planning guidance and advice on telecommunications including
the preparation of a national plan incorporating telecommunications development;
-
providing guidance and advice on health issues including the application
of a precautionary approach; and
-
recommendations to DTI about introducing requirements in licences for example
in relation to coverage and roaming agreements.
This further response deals with each of these in turn.
Extension of planning control over telecommunications development
In addition to the Committee's recommendations about the degree
of planning control that should be exercised over telecommunications development,
the Executive is also considering related recommendations from the Stewart Report,
in particular the recommendation "that for all base stations, including those
with masts under 15m, permitted development rights for their erection should
be revoked and that the siting of all new base stations should be subject to
the normal planning process".
The Executive recognises that one of the significant effects
of permitted development rights is that people likely to be affected by the
proposed development generally have little opportunity to express their views
about the proposal until details have been finalised and construction is underway.
The removal of permitted development rights and the consequent requirement to
apply for planning permission would bring with it the standard neighbour notification
arrangements and, therefore, greater opportunity for those most closely affected
to make representations to the planning authority before a decision on the planning
application is reached.
We recognise, however, the importance of the wireless telecommunications
networks to the economic and social well being of Scotland. We are also aware
of the potential implications of placing additional demands on Councils who
already deal with around 40,000 planning applications each year. We are
seeking, therefore, to ensure that the right balance is struck between what
does and what does not merit being subject to full planning control. At one
extreme, the erection of 15 metre mast with associated equipment housing
(which could be the size of a double garage) can, undoubtedly, affect significantly
people's visual amenity if it is sited inappropriately. We propose therefore
to consult on legislative proposals which would bring newly erected masts and
associated building works under full planning control. Alternatively, a base
station with an antenna which is nothing more than a colour-matched box, about
the size of a thick telephone directory, mounted on a shop front is unlikely
to cause any visual harm. Full planning control may not generally be necessary
for such development, although there are areas of special quality, such as conservation
areas, where the cumulative effect of small scale change can lead to an erosion
in environmental quality and greater control may be appropriate. It will be
crucial that we achieve agreed definitions of all the different types of equipment
so that we can be sure that all are subject to an appropriate degree of planning
control.
Since making its interim response, the Executive has set up
a Planning and Telecommunications Working Group. Through this we have established
constructive working relationships with and between representatives of the Federation
of the Electronics Industry, mobile and fixed wireless access phone operators,
CoSLA, planning authorities, and the Royal Town Planning Institute. We are currently
gathering detailed information about the wide range of types of installation
that are being, and will be, required to satisfy the increasing demand for mobile
communications technology. This will enable us to formulate detailed proposals
about what should and what should not require planning permission, what should
and what should not continue to enjoy permitted development rights and what
could perhaps be considered de minimis. We envisage a complete revision
of Class 67 of the General Permitted Development Order (development by
telecommunications code system operators) and will consult on draft legislation
later this summer.
In parallel with formulating legislative proposals we are preparing
a National Planning Policy Guideline (NPPG) and a Planning Advice Note (PAN).
The NPPG will, in common with other NPPGs, set the policy and legislative context,
provide background information, articulate the Executive's policy guidelines
including how planning authorities should take concerns about health effects
into account and highlight the action required of planning authorities and the
operators . The PAN will contain information and advice about the types of development
associated with mobile phones, the operational requirements of telecommunications
networks, siting and design generally and in specific locations such as conservation
areas, National Parks and National Scenic Areas. The aims are to highlight best
practice in planning for telecommunication development and to communicate it
to planning authorities, operators, interest groups and the public.
We are in close touch with counterparts in Whitehall Departments
as they develop the UK Government's proposals in the light of the Stewart
Report. We support the arrangements being put in place by the Radiocommunications
Agency (RA), which is responsible for allocation, maintenance and supervision
of the radio spectrum, to establish an independent process of audit of base
stations with a view to confirming that radio frequency emissions are within
requisite limits. The RA, which has a UK-wide remit, will have the requisite
resources to do this work. Further reference is made to the database later in
this paper.
Encouraging telecommunications operators and planning authorities
to discuss future development intentions
As already explained we have established a Planning and Telecommunications
Working Group to help to ensure that our proposals for controls over telecommunications
development strike the right balance between imposing undue restrictions which
will inhibit operators from meeting their service obligations and addressing
public concerns on the need for more effective regulation of the industry. It
is apparent that there is already a certain amount of dialogue between operators
and planning authorities although it is variable, and both agree that there
is scope for better communication to ensure that operators and planning authorities
better understand each other's requirements.
The proposed Planning Advice Note will emphasise the virtues
of, for example, early discussion about future development requirements, the
inclusion of policy and locational guidance in local plans, and detailed advice
on siting and design.
Although the Working Group has been established specifically
to help inform the development of proposals to address the Committee's and the
Stewart Report, we will consider the potential merit of retaining this forum
beyond the introduction of new planning controls and the publication of guidance
and advice, to review the situation in the future.
Establishing and maintaining local authority registers
of telecommunications developments
The Executive agrees with the objective of establishing better
data on telecommunication developments but has already set out its reservations
about how these recommendations might be implemented. In particular there is
the difficulty of establishing a comprehensive register of existing developments.
There is also a potential problem associated with works that are either de minimis
(ie so small that they do not sensibily count as development and are therefore
not caught by the planning process) or that retain the status of permitted development
and which are not notified to the planning authority. Planning authorities would
be unaware of such apparatus and would therefore be unable to include such apparatus
in registers they maintained, whereas the RA would pick up such apparatus through
the licensing procedure.
The Stewart Report also acknowledged the importance of registering
telecommunications developments and recommended "that a national database
be set up by Government giving details of all base stations and their emissions".
The Radiocommunications Agency (RA), an agency of the Department of Trade and
Industry, already maintains a limited register which it believes can be developed
to meet the Stewart recommendation. The register is currently maintained primarily
for the use of the RA and the industry, but discussions are taking place about
how it can be adapted to meet the needs of planning authorities and the public.
This approach has the particular merit that it is more likely to be comprehensive
than registers maintained by individual planning authorities though, of course,
their planning registers will record all base stations which require planning
permission.
Provision of planning guidance and advice including the
preparation of a national plan, incorporating telecommunications development
The Executive supports the recommendation about the preparation
of a National Planning Policy Guideline (NPPG) on telecommunications development.
In line with the Executive's commitment to prepare guidance in a more open and
transparent way, we propose to work with councils, the industry and others in
preparing the guidance which will also, of course, be issued for consultation
in the normal way. We have made an early start on this task by establishing
the Working Group. The Executive will also fulfil its earlier commitment to
issue best practice advice on telecommunications and planning in the form of
a Planning Advice Note (PAN). A NPPG and PAN on telecommunications development
will provide a national framework, set the requirements for local authority
development plans and give advice on best practice in siting and design. We
believe that together these will deliver what is required in a form with which
planning authorities and operators are familiar and we do not therefore propose
to prepare a national plan along the lines suggested by the Committee.
Work is now well in hand in preparing the NPPG and accompanying
PAN. Views about the content of the NPPG and PAN were gathered at a meeting
of the Planning and Telecommunications Working Group on 15 June. A summit on
planning and telecommunications will be held on 11 September. As well as the
aforementioned parties, representatives from amenity and environmental bodies
and a number of organisations who gave evidence to the Committee’s inquiry
have been invited to discuss the issues involved. A consultation package, including
a draft of the NPPG and details of proposed changes to legislation, will be
finalised in the light of views expressed at the summit and issued as soon as
possible. We will continue to involve the industry, planning authorities and
others as we develop the documents.
Provision of guidance and advice on health issues including
the application of a precautionary approach
The Executive's interim response indicated that it would be
necessary to await the Stewart Report before commenting on health issues and
the adoption of a precautionary approach.
A key conclusion from the Stewart Report is "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 the guidelines". This, we believe, should be largely
reassuring to the public even though the report goes on to say "However,
there can be indirect adverse effects on their well-being in some cases".
The Stewart Report explains that there are uncertainties in current scientific
knowledge and "that although it seems highly unlikely that the low levels
of radio frequency radiation from base stations would have significant, direct
adverse effects on health, the possibility of harm from exposures insufficient
to cause heating of tissues cannot yet be ruled out with confidence". The
Stewart Report suggests that anxiety about the scientific uncertainties being
ignored may affect the well-being of some.
A substantial research programme (50% funded by the industry)
is being embarked upon which will, over time, reduce these uncertainties. The
Scottish Executive is contributing to the research programme and will keep in
touch with developments.
The Scottish Executive and the UK Government concur with the
recommendation by each of the Committees that, as a precaution, the ICNIRP guidelines
should be adopted in place of those of the NRPB. As far as public exposure to
radio frequency radiation is concerned, this provides a fivefold reduction in
the maximum permitted field strength. Our current thinking is that operators,
when applying for planning permission or advising planning authorities of proposals
that qualify as permitted development, will be required to certify that the
installation will comply with ICNIRP guidelines. This is analogous to applicants
for planning permission certifying that they have conducted the requisite neighbour
notification procedures. Planning authorities will be able to rely on the independent
audit role of the Radiocommunications Agency regarding the guidelines, but are
unlikely to be in a position to monitor compliance themselves.
Planning guidance will include information about the consideration
of health issues in development planning and development control.
A further precautionary measure would be to encourage operators
and planning authorities to adopt a sequential approach to identifying appropriate
sites for new base stations. This might work on the basis that sensitive locations
such as schools, hospitals and residential areas might be seen as less desirable
sites although this poses potential perceptual problems in relation to locations
such as schools that already have base stations on them. In this regard it is
important to note that the Stewart Report does not recommend that there is any
need to remove existing equipment from schools or indeed from any other sensitive
location. Nor does it recommend that there is any need to introduce a moratorium
pending the introduction of revised planning arrangements.
Equally, we believe that the precautionary measures outlined
here, taken together, represent an appropriate degree of precaution given the
conclusions and recommendations of the Stewart Report. There is sensitivity
surrounding the handling of new proposals in advance of the new NPPG and secondary
legislation. In response to concerns expressed that mobile telephone companies
have accelerated their applications to avoid the new planning regime Scottish
Executive officials have monitored the situation. There is no evidence that
this is happening. There are claims that some planning authorities are currently
not determining planning applications for base stations until a new planning
regime is in place. Given that the Stewart Report recommends neither a moratorium
nor the removal of any existing masts, we see no need for such unilateral action
by planning authorities. We have written to them to that effect.
Introducing requirements in licences, for example in relation
to coverage and roaming agreements
DTI is still considering the Committee's recommendations relating
to, for example, roaming agreements. Their response will be relayed to the Committee
in due course.
| 
