Northern Ireland has a different planning system than that in England, we shall therefore go through it in some detail. The basics though as far as telecommunications are concerned is that the majority of installations require full planning permission. Links to copies of the relevant legislation and guidance are set out below in the Section on Legislation. There is a form of Permitted Development for the most insignificant of installations, but in the main all installations that are connected to mast require full planning permission.

The main peice of legislation is that of Planning (General Development) (Amendment) Order (Northern Ireland) 2003, which is effectively the Northern Ireland Development Order for telecoms. Whilst the Order first starts off by granting permitted development rights for effectively all telecoms developments by Electronic Communication Code System Operators, it the goes on to limit them to only a few minor installations, thus permission is first granted and then effectively removed where all the following applies:-

(a) it is to be carried out in a conservation area, an area of outstanding natural beauty, an area of special scientific interest, a National Park, or on a listed building:-
(i) unless it involves the installation, alteration or replacement of any underground apparatus; or
(ii) unless it involves the installation of new overhead lines supported by existing poles.
(b) the land is within a site of archaeological interest unless it involves the installation of new overhead lines supported by existing poles.
(c) it involves the installation, alteration or replacement of a mast or the installation, alteration or replacement of an antenna, structure, or other apparatus including equipment housing associated with a mast.
(d) it involves the installation, alteration or replacement of an antenna not included in (c) or the installation, alteration or replacement of other apparatus including equipment housing associated with such an antenna.
(e) it involves the installation, alteration or replacement of ground based equipment housing exceeding 90 cubic metres or, if located on a roof of a building, it would exceed 30 cubic metres.
(f) in the case of the installation, alteration or replacement of any apparatus other than -
(i) a public call box;
(ii) any apparatus which does not project above the surface of the ground; or
(iii) equipment housing, the ground or base area of the structure would exceed 1.5 square metres.

There are some exceptions to this for installations undertaken in an emergency, but only for the replacement of unserviceable apparatus (in otherwords to replace existing broken equipment). This is set out in Class B of the Development Order, with the following conditions:-

    (1) Development is permitted by Class B subject to the condition that the operator gives written notice of the development to the Department as soon as possible after the emergency begins, and in any case not later than 3 days thereafter.
    (2) Development is permitted by Class B subject to the condition that any apparatus or structure provided in accordance with that permission, shall -
(i) be located as close as operationally practicable to the existing unserviceable telecommunications apparatus;
(ii) where operationally practicable, not exceed the height of the existing telecommunications apparatus; and
(iii) at the expiry of the relevant period be removed from the land and the land restored to its condition before the development took place.

The normal process would therefore like other forms of development be by an application to the Planning Service for development permission. This is a totally different system than in the rest of the UK as whilst the Planning Service consults with the local authority, and local councillors it is the Department that makes the Decision not the elected representatives, therefore there is no local accountability. Appeals are then heard by the Planning Appeals Commission which is said to be an independent body similar in nature to the Planing Inspectorate in England and Wales. The process of the Commssion is that a Commissioner will compile a report on an appeal which in turn is then considered by a panel of 4 commissioners, there decision must be based on the report and once made is final. The only course of challenge being through the courts. Public Inquiries and Hearings are much rarear in NI than in the rest of the UK as it is the Department that requests the appeal (not the LPA), although an appellant can also request an appeal, telecom operators have shown a reluctance, there are therefore unlikely to be many telecom public inquiries (or hearings) in Northern Ireland. If you are likely to be making a representation using any of the processes you should read the PAC document Planning Appeals : Notes for Appellants, which sets out the time scales, etc.

Like in England and Wales there is a process set out in Planning Policy Statement 10 (PPS10) where the Code System Operator would be expected to undertake pre-application consultations with a range of organisations, however it has as its backbone the strategy of putting place a comprehensive telecommunication structure, thus the emphasis is on the role-out oftelecoms, irrespective of the consultation process.

PPS10 incorporates a number of specific policies, TEL 1 being:-

Policy Tel 1

Control of Telecommunications Development

The Department will permit proposals for telecommunications development where such proposals, together with any necessary enabling works, will not result in unacceptable damage to visual amenity or harm to environmentally sensitive features or locations.

Developers will therefore be required to demonstrate that proposals for telecommunications development, having regard to technical and operational constraints, have been sited and designed to minimise visual and environmental impact.

Proposals for the development of a new telecommunications mast will only be considered acceptable by the Department where the above requirements are met and it is reasonably demonstrated that:

(a) the sharing of an existing mast or other structure has been investigated and is not feasible; or
(b) a new mast represents a better environmental solution than other options.

Applications for telecommunications development by Code System Operators or broadcasters will need to include:

(1) information about the purpose and need for the particular development including a description of how it fits into the operator's or broadcaster's wider network;
(2) details of the consideration given to measures to mitigate the visual and environmental impact of the proposal; and
(3) where proposals relate to the development of a mobile telecommunications base station, a statement:

indicating its location, the height of the antenna, the frequency and modulation characteristics, details of power output; and
declaring that the base station when operational will meet the ICNIRP guidelines for public exposure to electromagnetic fields. Where information on the above matters is not made available or is considered inadequate the Department will refuse planning permission

An important aspect of PPS10 is that set out at para 6.6 in relation to de minimis:-

"Installation of the smallest antenna systems may be covered by the normal planning principle of de minimus. This term covers minor developments which, in relative terms, will not have a material effect on the external appearance of the building or structure on which they are installed. As a result they may not come within the legal definition of development and hence not require planning permission. Most conventional television aerials and their mountings have long been treated in this way, and the Department will continue to apply this approach to small telecommunications apparatus regardless of who installs it. The installation of some microcell base stations, such as those similar in appearance to burglar alarms, may be treated in this way."
Whilst specific policies in the England allow much larger installations to slip through without any formal application, the fact they are limiting them to the smallest types of installations does not mean that you should not be vegilant, and prepared to argue that even very small installations affect the external appearance of a building andtherefore should fall within the normal planning process.

The criteria for normal installations is considerably more robust as set out in para 6.8 of PPS10:-

"Where such larger telecommunications infrastructure is required all the components of the proposed development should be considered together. This includes the antennas (even if they will not all be in service initially), mast or other supporting structure, equipment housing, cable runs, fencing, planting, landscaping, access, power supply and land lines. They should all be sited and designed to minimise their visual and environmental impact. In some cases further information on visual impact may be required, such as a photomontage to show the proposed equipment in its wider setting. Exceptionally in designated or other sensitive landscapes a landscape or visual impact assessment may be needed".
This is far more precise and clear than the equivelant English policy of just stating issues relating to siting and design and leaving out the criteria relating to what actually forms the development, and even separating the elements into mast, headgear, antenna, associated inrastructure and equipment cabins, whilst here all aspects are taken into account within a single process.

In terms of health concerns then the NI match those of England in one in our considered opinion important aspect, because the 'Department' is both the decision maker and the policy maker it is arguable that a fair hearing cannot be seen to have occured in that whilst health is a material planning consideration, that must be taken into account, the restrictions imposed by the 'Department' within PPS10 of keeping such considerations to consideration of the production of an ICNIRP certificate, which the UK courts have found would fetter the obligation of the decision maker to fully take into account health concerns (beyond the certificates considerations - Susan Trevett v First Secretary of State (unreported)), a point which was conceeded by the UKs First Secretary of State in the Yasmin Skelt case, that is it would be contrary to law where an inspector (Commissioner in NI) failed to take health concerns up and above an ICNIRP certificate into account. Although this is primarily a Human Rights issue (Article 6.1 ECHR - Right to a Fair Trial), which the courts have said are protected by the ability to go to the High Court, it is different from the English context because of the different structure which is within greater control by the executive, thus greater ability for none consideration, it is therefore open to argue it is inconsistent with the right to a fair trial.

It is rare for those concerned about telecoms installations to consider that often, even encouraged by the system, that new developments such as commercial buildings and even residential buildings have incorporated into the design telecoms installations, which may well be considered along with the application for that development and therefore generally not be known by the local community who may otherwise have lodged objections. Therefore Planning Sanity recommends that public interest groups concerned at the proliferation of telecoms installations should be vegilant against such potential back door approval of installations without appropriate comment being made.

There are many aspects of the process in NI where the degree of information requested is considerably greater than that of England, for instance there is a specific obligation to set out the Operators Traffic Light rating for the site, and information relating to the potential noise element of the installation, such as from cooling fans in equipment housing. These special considerations should be studied in detail to ensure that every posible avenue of concern is raised. DCAN 14 has a useful section Annex E that sets out the way in which the Traffic Light Scheme should be calculated, often it is important as far as residents are able for them to also undertake these tests to see if the figure they arrive at matches that of the Operator and if it does not then to make representations on that point.

It is also important that residents look at the local plan process and make representation at emerging plans, although Northern Ireland has a centralised system it still has a number of local plans. In the main these are online, those that are not should be viewed at local offices. look though local existing local plan policy to see if there are any policies that might be helpful, whilst making representation through the plan process in an effort t influencing future policy that might make the difference between a development being approved and rejected.

The Electronic Communication equally applies to Norther Ireland as it does to the rest of the UK, and therefore it is possible to both seek to remove a mast under the provisions of Code 17, or to seek compensation under the provisions of Code 16 (see the respective briefings). Many of the other aspects that relate to telecoms in England also apply, our Phone Mast Forum contains many reports and briefings.