Sunderland City Council reject plans for a new 5G mast
An application was lodged in September for land in the St Chad’s ward
Plans for a new 5G mast on the outskirts of Sunderland have been thrown out by council planners.
Back in September 2021, Sunderland City Council’s planning department received an application for land adjacent to The Dolphin pub in the St Chad’s ward.
This included the removal of an existing 15 metre monopole off Ashdown Road to make way for a 20 metre monopole supporting six antennas and two transmission dishes.
The plans came from Cornerstone Telecommunications to allow for upgraded equipment to provide 5G coverage to the area.
A supporting statement submitted to the council also outlined the reasons for the planning application.
This included a “continued network improvement program and technical requirement to provide new 5G coverage to the Sunderland area.”
The document reads: “A sequential approach has been taken to ensure that existing masts and equipment are used where possible.
“Following technical assessment however, the existing streetworks
installation cannot accommodate the operator’s latest technical requirements.
“As such a new higher and stronger streetworks installation is required for this upgrade to the Telefonica network.”
During consultation on the plans, no objections were raised by Sunderland City Council’s environmental health department.
Despite this, the proposals were turned down by council planning officers on Tuesday, November 9.
A decision notice posted on the council’s website said the new development would clash with national planning guidance and several policies in the council’s Core Strategy and Development Plan.
This included the “proposed monopole introducing an obtrusive and unattractive feature to the locality, to the detriment of the visual amenities and character and appearance of the area.”
The planning decision follows a similar application from Cornerstone Telecommunications to install a 20 metre monopole near Tunstall Hills in the Silksworth ward.
This application was also refused by planning officers on the grounds of “harm” to the character of the area and the amenity of neighbours.