Checklist for a prior approval under Part 16 telecoms

A Part 16 prior approval checklist is short because the authority's remit is narrow. For electronic communications apparatus installed under Part 16 of Schedule 2 to the General Permitted Development Order 2015, the only matters the local planning authority may consider are siting and appearance. The need for the network, the choice of technology and the health effects of radio frequency emissions are all outside the decision, provided the required declaration accompanies the application.

That narrowness cuts both ways. It means objections about health get no traction. It also means a weak siting and appearance case has nowhere else to hide, and most refusals are about visual impact on a protected area or a residential frontage.

What Part 16 permits and the limits that apply

Class A of Part 16 permits development by or on behalf of an electronic communications code operator for the purposes of the operator's network. That covers the installation, alteration and replacement of apparatus, masts, antennas, equipment cabinets and associated development.

The limits are set out in the Class itself and they differ according to what is proposed and where. New ground-based masts are treated differently from increases in height to existing masts. Apparatus on buildings is treated differently from apparatus on the ground. And land designated under article 2(3) of the Order attracts lower thresholds than unprotected land.

The height figures have changed. Part 16 was amended in April 2022 to increase the permitted heights for masts and to widen the right in several respects, and the Order has been amended since. Read the current consolidated text of Part 16 Class A for the applicable figure rather than relying on any summary, including this one. Getting that wrong means submitting a prior approval application for development that needs full permission, and losing 56 days finding out.

Two standing conditions apply to development under the Class. Apparatus must be removed as soon as reasonably practicable after it is no longer needed, and the land restored to its previous condition. Build the removal obligation into the lease, because the landowner is the one left with the mast.

Siting and appearance as the only prior approval matters

The application is a request for a determination as to whether prior approval is required to the siting and appearance of the development. The authority can approve, refuse, or determine that prior approval is not required.

What that means in practice is that the supporting statement should be almost entirely about where the apparatus goes and what it looks like. Site selection and the alternatives considered. Why the chosen location works technically and why the rejected ones did not. Whether an existing structure or mast could have been shared. The colour, finish, profile and screening of the apparatus. Visual impact from identified viewpoints.

Mast sharing deserves its own paragraph. The industry code of practice on wireless network development expects operators to consider sharing existing sites and using existing structures before proposing a new mast, and authorities ask for the evidence. A statement that asserts sharing was explored, without naming the sites examined and the reason each was unsuitable, invites a refusal on siting. Our Telecommunications Compliance page sets out what the supporting document covers, and councils usually expect a suitably qualified author with radio frequency expertise, with professional review strongly advised.

The exposure compliance declaration

The application must be accompanied by a declaration that the equipment and the installation are designed to be in full compliance with the public exposure guidelines of the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection.

Three points about it. It is a declaration, not an assessment, and it covers the installation as designed rather than a measurement after commissioning. National policy is clear that authorities should not question the need for the network or determine health safeguards where the declaration is provided. And it must actually be in the submission, because a missing declaration is a straightforward reason to treat the application as incomplete.

Where the site is a shared mast, the declaration should address cumulative exposure from all operators on the structure, since that is the circumstance members of the public and councillors ask about most often.

Notice, publicity and consultation

Three strands, and they are frequently conflated.

1. The developer's own notice. Part 16 requires notice to be given, by site display or by serving notice on owners and occupiers, before or at the time of applying, with the form and period set out in the Order.
2. The authority's publicity. The Development Management Procedure Order 2015 requires the authority to publicise the application in the usual ways, and representations received go to the siting and appearance question.
3. Pre-application consultation under the code of practice. Operators are expected to consult the authority before submitting, and to consult schools and colleges where apparatus is proposed within a defined distance of them. That consultation is not a statutory requirement in the Order, and failing to do it is a reliable way to generate local opposition that then expresses itself as a siting objection.

Record all three in the submission with dates. An officer under time pressure with a complete, dated procedural record is a faster officer.

Designated land and its effect on the right

Article 2(3) land covers conservation areas, National Landscapes, National Parks, the Broads and World Heritage Sites. On that land, thresholds within Part 16 are lower and some development is taken outside the right altogether.

Other designations operate separately. Apparatus fixed to a listed building needs listed building consent whatever Part 16 says, and apparatus affecting a scheduled monument needs scheduled monument consent. A site within an aerodrome or defence safeguarding zone brings consultation with the relevant body, and masts near an aerodrome may need lighting or a height restriction, so check the safeguarding maps before the lease is signed.

Where the apparatus sits in a sensitive landscape and the authority asks for more than photographs, a Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment with agreed viewpoints is the proportionate answer.

Drawings and supporting documents

The bundle for a straightforward mast or rooftop installation:

• Location plan at 1:1250 or 1:2500 with the site outlined in red
• Site plan at 1:200 or 1:500 showing the apparatus, cabinets, fencing, access and any tree cover
• Elevations at a stated scale showing overall height above ground level and above the building where relevant
• Antenna and cabinet specification sheets with dimensions and finishes
• Photographs from identified viewpoints, with a plan showing where each was taken
• Photomontages or wireline views for a mast in an open or sensitive setting
• The exposure compliance declaration
• A site-specific supplementary information statement covering network need in outline, site selection, alternatives and sharing
• The pre-application consultation record
• Evidence of the developer's notice, with dates

A concise Planning Statement tying the siting and appearance case together is worth the pages even though the matters are narrow, and where the installation has a designed appearance element, the reasoning sits comfortably in a short Design and Access Statement.

Timescales and non-determination

The determination period for a Part 16 prior approval is 56 days from receipt of a valid application, and the consequence of the authority not determining within that period is set out in the Order. Check the current wording rather than assuming, because the mechanism differs between prior approval classes and getting it wrong means building without authority.

Validity is where the 56 days are usually lost. A fee is payable and the figure is indexed annually, so check the current schedule. A missing declaration, an unserved notice, or elevations that do not show overall height will all stop the clock before it starts.

Where a full application is required

Four situations take the proposal outside Part 16. Apparatus exceeding the dimensional limits in the Class. Development excluded from the right on designated land. Apparatus requiring listed building or scheduled monument consent, where the separate consent is needed in addition. And development by someone who is not an electronic communications code operator, since the Class is available only to operators.

Rights to install apparatus on someone else's land come from the Electronic Communications Code in the Communications Act 2003, not from planning. A code agreement gives no planning permission, and a prior approval gives no right of access. Deal with both, in that order, and keep the removal and restoration obligation aligned between them.

For the other documents a proposal may need, browse all 66 report types by category.

This is general guidance, not legal advice. Check the current text of Part 16 and the application requirements with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it. PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.