®Planning appeal decision
Grass Verge at Shenley Lane, Selly Oak, Birmingham, B29 4JD
Planning appeal 3271271 at Grass Verge at Shenley Lane, Selly Oak, Birmingham, B29 4JD (Birmingham City Council) was dismissed on 17 August 2021 by Inspector McDonagh C, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: The effect of the siting and appearance of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area, including the setting of heritage assets, and whether any harm caused is outweighed by the need to site the installation in the location proposed having regard to the potential availability of alternative sites.
an application for Prior Notification for the proposed telecommunications installation of a 20m height column supporting 6 no. antennas, 2 no. 0.3mm microwave dishes, 1 no. equipment cabinet and associated works
- Authority
- Birmingham City Council
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- telecoms · Other minor developments
- Inspector
- McDonagh C
- Postcode
- B29 4HZ
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- The effect of the siting and appearance of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area, including the setting of heritage assets, and whether any harm caused is outweighed by the need to site the installation in the location proposed having regard to the potential availability of alternative sites
What decided it
The weight attached to the public benefits of 5G provision was insufficient to outweigh the harm to the character and appearance of the area and the less than substantial harm to the designated heritage assets caused by the siting and appearance of the development.
The public benefits of 5G infrastructure and the minimum scale necessary to achieve required coverage were weighed against the harm to character and appearance and less than substantial harm to heritage assets; the balance tipped against the proposal.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Birmingham Plan Unitary Development Plan (adopted October 2005) paragraphs 8.55 and 8.55 A-CTelecommunications Development: Mobile Phone Infrastructure Supplementary Planning Document (adopted March 2008)
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 114Paragraph 115Paragraph 202
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision
More decisions in Birmingham City Council
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2021
- Dismissed23 March 20263376018Footpath Outside 7 St Mary’s Row, Moseley, Birmingham, B13 8HW
- Dismissed23 March 20263375839Footpath Outside 7 St Mary’s Row, Moseley, Birmingham
- Dismissed23 March 20263375725Footpath Outside 86C Old Snow Hill, Birmingham, B4 6HW
- Dismissed28 August 20253365270Stratford Road, Hall Green, Birmingham, B28 9EF
- Allowed22 August 20253366060Jamia Masjid Haroonia, 766 Alum Rock Road, Birmingham, B8 3PX
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.