Salford City Council

Supplementary Planning Document

Telecommunications

Consultation Statement – September 2013

1Introduction

1.1This document sets out the consultation that has been undertaken in relation to amending the existing telecommunications SPD which was adopted in July 2007. It sets out the persons consulted when preparing the SPD and also includes a summary of the main issues raised and how those issues have been addressed in the revised document.

2Statement of community involvement

2.1The city council’s statement of community involvement (SCI) was formally adopted on 20 January 2010. The SCI aims to increase public involvement in planning processes. It sets out who will be involved, by what method and at what point in the process of document production or in the determination of planning applications. It gives more certainty to those wishing to get involved in the planning process.

2.2The SCI sets the council's policy for community engagement in the production of formal planning documents. Below is a summary of the SCI guidance in respect of consultation at the different stages of SPD production:

Stage 1 – pre-production

This stage is based around the gathering of evidence and asking people to identify issues and make suggestions in order to inform the preparation of the SPD.

Stage 2 – production

A draft document is produced following the evidence gathering pre-production stage. Whilst the regulations simply require that draft SPDs are subject to a consultation period of at least 4 weeks, the SCI commits the city council to always consulting on the draft SPD for 6 weeks in order to maximise potential involvement. The city council will carefully consider any representations received during the consultation period and will update the SPD where it is considered necessary and appropriate.

Stage 3 – adoption

The SPD will then be adopted. A summary of representations received and how they have been taken into account will be published at this stage.

3Background to the telecommunications SPD

3.1Salford City Council is updating the existing telecommunications supplementary planning document (SPD) to ensure that it accurately reflects advancements in technology, the current government approach to telecommunications development, and is consistent with the national planning policy guidance and other changes to legislation that have occured since the document was first adopted.

4Scoping consultation

4.1In July 2012, the city council sought the views of stakeholders and consultees on its intention to update the telecommunications SPD (together with four other existing SPDs on design and crime, house extensions, trees and development, and hot food takeaways). The city council requested any comments that peoplemight have on the existing SPDs and in particularwhether any of the policies within them are still appropriate for use or should beamended. The consultation referred to updating the SPDs to support the emerging Core Strategy, but with the withdrawal of the Core Strategy in September 2012 the SPDs will be supplementary to the saved Unitary Development Plan policies.

4.2The city council consulted 288 consultees registered on its planning consultee database, including all statutory consultation bodies together with other consultees who the city council considered may have an interest in the production of the various SPDs. This included businesses, residents and community groups who had previously expressed an interest in or submitted representations on related planning policy documents. A list of all those consulted is set out at Annex A. A copy of the letter which was sent to consultees is set out at Annex B.

4.3Comments were invited from Monday 9 July 2012 to Monday 20August 2012.

4.4Representations on the telecommunications SPD were received from:

  • Network Rail
  • English Heritage
  • Everything Everywhere
  • Mobile Operators Association
  • Barbara Keeley MP

4.5A schedule of representations received is outlined in Annex C.

5Consultation on draft telecommunications supplementary planning document

5.1A public consultation was undertaken on the draft telecommunications SPD for a period of eight weeks from 10 May 2013 to 5 July 2013. At this time, the city council consulted the same 288 consultees on its planning consultee database that were consulted at the scoping stage. See annex A.

5.2Details of the consultation were also published on the city council’s website and an electronic version of the covering letter and the draft SPD were available to download. Copies of all documents were also made available at each of the city’s libraries. An article was placed in the June 2013 edition of Life in Salford which was available on line, and distributed to every home and business in Salford during the week beginning 3 June 2013. See annex D for the covering letter and Annex E for the Life in Salford article text.

5.3Ten representations were received on the draft SPD seven of which were “no comments”. Full details of all of these representations can be viewed in Annex F.

ANNEX A – List of stakeholders consulted during production of telecommunications SPD

CONSULTEE / CONSULTED AT SCOPING STAGE
ACADEMY FOR RABBINICAL RESEARCH / X
AGE UK / X
ALDER KING / X
ALDERBROOK INVESTMENTS LTD / X
AMERICHEM / X
ANCIENT MONUMENTS SOCIETY / X
ARCHDEACON OF SALFORD / X
ARMITAGE RESIDENTS ASSOC. / X
ARMSTRONG BURTON PLANNING / X
ARQIVA / X
BANGLADESH ASSOCIATION / X
BAO LTD / X
BARRATT MANCHESTER LTD / X
BARTON WILLMORE PARTNERSHIP / X
BEECH FARM RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION / X
BELLWAY HOMES LTD NORTH WEST / X
BNP PARIBAS REAL ESTATE / X
BOLTON METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL / X
BREEM CENTRE / X
BRITISH WATERWAYS / X
BROADWAY MALYAN PLANNING / X
BROCK CARMICHAEL ARCHITECTS / X
BUCKINGHAM BINGO / X
BURY MBC / X
BUSINESS CONSULTATIVE FORUM / X
CA PLANNING / X
CABE / X
CARRINGTON PARISH COUNCIL / X
CB RICHARD ELLIS LTD / X
CBI - NORTH WEST OFFICE / X
CENTRAL SALFORD URC / X
CENTRE FOR LOCAL ECONOMIC STRATEGIES / X
CERDA PLANNING / X
CHESHIRE POLICE AUTHORITY / X
CHESTERS COACHES / X
CHRIS THOMAS LTD / X
CHURCH OF ENGLAND / X
CITY AIRPORT MANCHESTER LTD / X
CIVIC TRUST NORTHERN OFFICE / X
CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY / X
CLA NORTH / X
CLAREMONT COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION / X
CLIFF WALSINGHAM AND CO. / X
CLIFTON HAMLET / X
CLIFTON OVER 60 / X
COLLIERS CRE / X
COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL / X
CONTOUR HOMES / X
COOPERATIVE GROUP PROPERTY DIVISION / X
COPTHORNE HOTEL / X
COUNCIL FOR BRITISH ARCHAEOLOGY / X
COUNTRYSIDE PROPERTIES / X
CPRE LANCASHIRE BRANCH / X
CRAUNTON HOUSE ASSOCIATION OF TENANTS / X
CTL ESTATES / X
CULCHETH AND GLAZEBURY PARISH COUNCIL / X
CUSSONS TECHNOLOGY / X
DALTON WARNER DAVIES / X
DANDARA / X
DAVIDWILSONHOMES / X
DE POL ASSOCIATES / X
DE TRAFFORDS RESIDENT ASSOC. / X
DEGINSSA CC UK LTD / X
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT / X
DEPT OF CULTURE MEDIA AND SPORT / X
DISABILITY RIGHTS COMMISSION / X
DIVERSITY LEADERS FORUM / X
DORRIBO T/A REGIONAL MAP DISTRIBUTERS / X
DPP / X
DRIVERS JONAS / X
ECCLES AND SALFORD MOSQUE / X
ECCLES SAVINGS AND LOANS CLUB / X
ELAN HOMES / X
ELLESMERE ENGINEERING CO LTD / X
ELLESMEREPARK RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION / X
ENGLISH HERITAGE / X
ENGLISH PARTNERSHIPS / X
ENTEC UK LTD / X
ENVIOLINK NW / X
ENVIRONMENT AGENCY / X
EVERGREEN / X
F E BARBOR LTD / X
FIRST PLAN / X
FORESTRY COMMISSION NW / X
FRAMPTONS / X
FRIENDS, FAMILIES AND TRAVELLERS AND TRAVELLER LAW REFORM PROJECT / X
FUSION / X
GEORGE WIMPEY MANCHESTER LTD / X
GL HEARN / X
GM ARCHAEOLOGICAL UNIT / X
GM POLICE AUTHORITY / X
GM POLICE FORCE HQ / X
GMP DESIGN FOR SECURITY / X
GOVERNMENT OFFICE NORTH WEST / X
GRAHAM BOLTON PLANNING / X
GREAT PLACES / X
GREATER MANCHESTER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE / X
GREATER MANCHESTER ECOLOGY UNIT / X
GREATER MANCHESTER FIRE AND RESCUE / X
GREATER MANCHESTER GEOLOGICAL UNIT / X
GREATER MANCHESTER INTEGRATED TRANSPORT AUTHORITY / X
GREATER MANCHESTER POLICE / X
GREATER MANCHESTER WASTE DISPOSAL AUTHORITY / X
GREENOAKS LTD / X
GROUNDWORK MANCHESTER SALFORD AND TRAFFORD / X
GVA GRIMLEY LTD / X
HARLAND MACHINE SYSTEMS LTD / X
HEALTH AND SAFETY EXECUTIVE / X
HIGHAM AND CO / X
HIGHWAYS AGENCY / X
HILL STREET RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION / X
HMP & YOI FOREST BANK / X
HOLM COURT TENANTS ASSOCIATION / X
HOME BUILDERS FEDERATION / X
HOMES AND COMMUNITIES AGENCY / X
HOURIGAN CONNOLLY / X
HOW PLANNING LLP / X
INSTITUTE OF DIRECTORS NORTH WEST / X
IRLAM MEDICAL CENTRE / X
IRWELL VALLEY HA / X
J. FLETCHER (ENGINEERS) LTD / X
JEWISH REPRESENTATIVE COUNCIL OF MANCHESTER / X
JMP CONSULTING / X
JOHN ROSE ASSOCIATES / X
JWPC LTD / X
KENYON RESIDENTS / X
KING STURGE / X
KING STURGE LLP / X
KIRKWELLS / X
KNIGHT FRANK LLP / X
LAMBERT SMITH HAMPTON / X
LANCS CIRCUIT OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES / X
LIDL UK PROPERTIES / X
MAGNESIUM ELEKTRON LTD / X
MANCHESTER AIRPORT GROUP / X
MANCHESTER CITY COUNCIL / X
MANCHESTER DIOCESAN BOARD OF FINANCE / X
MANCHESTER DOORS & CUBICALS / X
MANCHESTER FRIENDS OF THE EARTH / X
MANCHESTER JEWISH FEDERATION / X
MANCHESTER SALFORD HOUSING MARKET PATHFINDER / X
MANCHESTER SHIP CANAL COMPANY / X
MATTHEWS AND GOODMAN / X
MAWDSLEY BROOKS CO / X
MILLER HOMES LTD / X
MILLER METCALFE / X
MISTER BLISTER LTD / X
MOBILE OPERATORS ASSOCIATION / X
MONCHEL PARKMAN / X
MONTON GREEN RESIDENTS / X
MORRIS HOMES (NORTH) LTD / X
MORSTON ASSETS LTD / X
NATHANIAL LICHFIELD AND PARTNERS / X
NATIONAL FARMERS UNION / X
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF GYPSY LIASION GROUPS / X
NATIONAL GRID / X
NATURAL ENGLAND / X
NETWORK RAIL (INFRASTRUCTURE) LTD / X
NEW PROSPECT / X
NIMANS LTD / X
NJL CONSULTING / X
NORTH WEST CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE / X
NORTH WEST REGIONAL LEADERS BOARD / X
NOVEMBRE PROPERTIES LTD. / X
NOVOTEL MANCHESTER WEST / X
NPOWER RENEWABLES / X
NW REGIONAL HOUSING BOARD / X
NW STRATEGIC HEALTH AUTHORITY / X
OFF THE RAILS LTD / X
OLDHAM MBC / X
ORANGE PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES LTD / X
PARTINGTON HOUSING ASSOCIATION / X
PARTINGTON TOWN COUNCIL / X
PARTNERS IN SALFORD / X
PAUL BUTLER ASSOCIATES / X
PEACOCK AND SMITH / X
PEEL HOLDINGS LTD / X
PEEL INVESTMENTS LTD / X
PEOPLE FIRST MANCHESTER / X
PERSIMMON HOMES NW / X
PLANNING POTENTIAL / X
PLUSWORK LTD / X
POST OFFICE PROPERTY HOLDINGS / X
PRDS / X
PRIMARY CARE TRUST / X
RANDALL THORP / X
RAPAR / X
RAPLEYS / X
RECLAIMING OUR COMMUNITIES / X
RED ROSE FOREST / X
REDROW HOMES / X
REDROW HOMES (NORTH WEST) LTD. / X
RIVERSIDE ISLAND TENANTS ASSOC / X
RIXTON WITH GLAZEBROOK PARISH COUNCIL / X
RMS INTERNATIONAL / X
ROCHDALE MBC / X
ROGER HANNAH AND CO. / X
ROGER TYM & PARTNERS / X
ROLAND BARDSLEY (BUILDERS LTD) / X
RSPB / X
SAFETY SYSTEMS UK LTD / X
SALFORD CITIZENS ADVICE BUREAU / X
SALFORD COMMUNITY NETWORK / X
SALFORD COUNCIL FOR VOLUNTARY SERVICE / X
SALFORD CRIME AND DISORDER REDUCTION PARTNERSIP / X
SALFORD DEAF GATHERING / X
SALFORD DISABILITY FORUM / X
SALFORD DISABLED MOTORISTS ASS. / X
SALFORD ELIM CHURCH / X
SALFORD FORUM OF OLDER PEOPLE / X
SALFORD LINK PROJECT / X
SALFORD PRIMARY CARE TRUST / X
SALFORD YOUTH SERVICE / X
SALVATION ARMY / X
SANDERSON WEATHERALL (ROYAL MAIL) / X
SAVILLS / X
SCOTT WILSON PLANNING CONSULTANTS / X
SEDGWICK ASSOCIATES / X
SEEDLEY AND LANGWORTHY PARTNERSHIP / X
SHELTER (LONDON) / X
SKILLS FUNDING AGENCY / X
SOUTHGARTH RESIDENTS ASSOC. / X
SPORT ENGLAND NW / X
STEVEN ABBOTT ASSOCIATES LLP / X
STEWART ROSS ASSOCIATES / X
STOCKPORT COUNCIL / X
STOREYS:SSP / X
SUSTAINABILITY NORTH WEST / X
SWINTON JUDO CLUB / X
TAMESIDE MBC / X
TARMAC CENTRAL LIMITED / X
TAYLOR WIMPY UK LTD / X
TESCO / X
THE WILDLIFE TRUST / X
THE BANK / X
THE COAL AUTHORITY / X
THE COOPERATIVE GROUP LTD / X
THE DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PARTNERSHIP / X
THE EMERSON GROUP / X
THE LAWN TENNIS ASSOCIATION / X
THE PLANNING BUREAU LTD / X
THE SEEDLEY AND LANGWORTHY TRUST / X
THE SPAB / X
THE STABLES / X
THE THEATRES TRUST / X
THE TWENTIETH CENTURY SOCIETY / X
THE WOODLAND TRUST / X
THORN COURT TENANTS ASSOC. / X
TRAFFORD MBC / X
TRANSPORT FOR GREATER MANCHESTER / X
TURLEY ASSOCIATES / X
TYLER PARKES PARNERSHIP / X
UK COAL HEAD OFFICE / X
UNITED COOPERATIVES LTD / X
UNITED UTILITIES / X
UNITED UTILITIES PROPERTY SERVICES / X
VINCENT AND GORBING / X
VIRIDOR / X
WAINHOMES (NW) LTD / X
WALTON & CO / X
WARRINGTON BOROUGH COUNCIL / X
WEASTE COMMUNITY WATCH / X
WELLINGTON STREET WEST RESIDENTS ASSOC. / X
WESTHOUGHTON TOWN COUNCIL / X
WHITE YOUNG GREEN PLANNING / X
WIGAN COUNCIL / X
WILLIAM SUTTON HA LTD / X
WRIGHTINGTON PARISH COUNCIL / X
HAZEL BLEARS MP / X
BARBARA KEELEY MP / X
MR GRAHAM STRINGER MP / X
PETER BALL / X
MR DJ BANKS / X
DEREK BUTTERWORTH / X
L CHAPPELL / X
RICHARD FEARNALL / X
CHRISTOPHER GRAY / X
GARY JAMES / X
TERRY MANFORD / X
MR NAZAR / X
CM PATEL / X
BERYL PATTEN / X
R QURESHI / X
K TAYLOR / X
MR P TRAYNOR / X
MRS P WALKER / X
B WETHERALL / X
JAMES YOUNG / X

1

ANNEX B – Covering letter to consultees on scoping stage

ANNEX C - Representations Received at the Scoping Stage and the Response of the city council

Organisation / Representation / Council Response
Network Rail / Would request that they are notified of all planning applications to erect telecommunications masts and equipment as it is difficult to determine the impact of masts and equipment upon the operational railway. It should not be assumed that close proximity of masts to the operational railway is the only area of concern/potential interference of railway signalling and telecoms equipment. / The city council will discuss this issue with Urban Vision which provides the development management service for Salford.
English Heritage / The installation of equipment on church towers can impact on the fabric, appearance and future maintenance of the building. Where appropriate telecommunication companies should be encouraged to share equipment thereby preventing proliferation of it in and around a place of worship. / Policy TEL1 reflects the NPPF which encourages site sharing in paragraph 43. Development on a listed building or within a conservation area is subject to separate controls. Specific reference to the sensitivity of such locations in included in policy TEL1.
Everything Everywhere Limited / The SPD is silent in respect of a policy position relating to the protection of all existing telecommunications apparatus and buildings from inappropriate and potentially harmful adjacent development. Any policy should make it clear that permission will be refused where unacceptable harm to telecommunications operations is identified. / Policy TEL 4 now relates to the protection of existing telecommunications apparatus, microwave links and switching stations and states permission will not be permitted for new development where it would have a significant adverse impact upon the operation of existing equipment.
One of the key objectives in paragraph 5.6 should be to ensure that existing telecommunications apparatus, microwave links and switching stations are protected from new development. / Now included as a fourth key objective – see paragraph 4.6.
In section 6 “Processing applications” it should be clarified that the potential impact upon the operation of this equipment will be a material consideration in the determining of planning applications. / Processing Applications is now included in section 5. Paragraph 5.2 provides this clarification.
The document should include an assertion that the city council will consult with nearby telecommunication operators where the location of sensitive telecommunications equipment and buildings housing equipment is known and will also encourage prospective developers and applicants to do likewise to identify issues/mitigation at earliest possible date. / This is now included in paragraph 5.3.
The Mobile Operators Association / The consolidation and changing pattern of network and infrastructure sharing should be reflected within the document. / The provision of mobile phone operators is outlined in paragraph 2.4. Policy TEL1 outlines the locations where telecommunications development should be and emphasises the sharing of sites and installations where possible (reflecting the NPPF).
The revised SPD should contain relevant policies, guidance and advice to facilitate the necessary infrastructure rollout in order to support sustainable economic growth within Salford. / It is considered that this in inherent in the draft document.
Barbara Keeley MP / The document should continue to give serious consideration to visual amenity, residential amenity, the appearance, character of ancient monuments, listed building or conservation area and sites or features of ecological, geological, archaeological, landscape or recreational value, and any possible risk to residents health. Telecommunications equipment should be located away from residential properties, schools and hospitals. / These issues are all identified in saved UDP policy DEV1 which will continue to be applied.
In relation to the siting of equipment, paragraph 44 of the NPPF is clear that “Local planning authorities should not impose a ban on new telecommunications development in certain areas... or insist on minimum distances between new telecommunications development and existing development”. Paragraph 44 of the NPPF also states that local authorities should not seek to “determine health safeguards if the proposal meets International Commission guidelines for public exposure.”
Policy TEL2 seeks to protect visual amenity but it is not possible to place a blanket ban on telecommunications equipment near to residential properties, school and hospitals. However, in accordance with paragraph 45 of the NPPF schools do have to be consulted when a mast is proposed nearby.

ANNEX D – Consultation Letter May 2013-09-10

Annex E – Text for the Life in Salford Article: Issue one – 3 June 2013

Have your say

Salford City Council is currently consulting on

changes to two key planning documents used

to make decisions on planning applications.

Have a say on the positioning of

telecommunications masts and equipment

and also whether takeaways should be

restricted near schools by going to

and

or by telephoning 0161 793 3782.

You have until 5 July 2013.

ANNEX F – Representations received at the draft consultation stage and the response of the city council

Organisation / Representation / Council response
Mobile operators Association / Operators use the Traffic Light Rating Model for determining levels of community consultation and consider it more appropriate to remove the 200m radius referred to in paragraph 5.18 within which the council and applicant will consult a school or college. / The reference to the 200m distance in the text has been amended to say that the council and the applicant may notify the school/college depending on its relationship to the application site. This allows sufficient flexibility to consult with a school if considered appropriate.
It is considered that policy TEL3 is overly restrictive when it refers to installations sited within 20m of pedestrian crossings or road junctions. Operators do not use a set distance but assess each location on an individual basis and therefore it is recommended that this distance is removed. / Paragraph 6.14 seeks to ensure that telecommunications equipment does not impede roadside visibility splays and sight lines and highlights that installations within 20m of pedestrian crossings and junctions have the potential to obstruct views. The wording does not state categorically that no installations will be allowed within 20m of a crossing and therefore it is considered that the wording allows sufficient flexibility and is not overly restrictive. No changes made.
It is considered that the 2m footway width is beyond what is considered to be an acceptable limit, especially when the Department of Transport’s “Inclusive Mobility” Best Practice Guidance is taken into consideration. This states at the absolute minimum, that where there is an obstacle, there should be 1000mm clear space with the maximum length of restricted length to be no more than 6metres. It is recommended that the policy should instead state “Avoid reducing the footway to an unacceptable width”. / The Best Practice guidance referred to states that “A clear width of 2000mm allows two wheelchairs to pass one another comfortably. This should be regarded as the minimum under normal circumstances” (section 3.1). The 2m requirement is therefore considered appropriate, and it would be for the operator to demonstrate that special circumstances apply that justifies a narrower width.
United Utilities / Include additional text in policy TEL 1 to secure the future protection of community utility services. / Comments noted. An additional paragraph has been included at the end of chapter 5, that states that an impact assessment will be required for proposals that affect community utility services.
Environment Agency / Advise that where there are proposals to install telecommunications equipment within 8m of a designated main river, prior written approval will be required from the Environment Agency under the Water Resources Act 1991. / An additional paragraph has been included at the end of chapter 5 Processing Applications, highlighting this requirement.
Manchester Airport Group / The city of Salford falls outside the aerodrome perimeter and therefore there are no objections. / n/a
English Heritage / No comments. / n/a
Highways Agency / No comments. / n/a
Network Rail / No comments. / n/a
Oldham Council / No comments. / n/a
Coal Authority / No comments. / n/a
Swak Miah / No comments. / n/a

1