A telecoms mast upgrade under the Part 16 route
On a Part 16 prior approval the council decides siting and appearance, nothing else. How the 56 day period works and what a complete submission contains.
Most mast upgrades in England proceed as telecoms mast prior approval rather than as a full planning application. Part 16 of Schedule 2 to the General Permitted Development Order grants the right, and all the local planning authority gets to decide is siting and appearance. It cannot refuse on need, on competition between operators, or on health grounds where the apparatus conforms to the recognised exposure guidelines.
The procedural prize is the 56 day period. Where the authority fails to determine a prior approval application within 56 days of receipt, the operator may proceed. That single rule shapes how these applications are prepared and how they are handled.
The rights Part 16 gives code operators
Part 16 Class A permits development by or on behalf of an electronic communications code operator for the purposes of its network. Operator status comes from the electronic communications code in Schedule 3A to the Communications Act 2003, and an applicant who is not a code operator cannot use Part 16 at all.
The rights cover installation, alteration and replacement of apparatus, including masts, antennas, dishes, cabinets and radio equipment housing, within limits on height, width and volume set out in the class. Those limits were widened by amendments to the Order in April 2022, which increased the permissible height and bulk of new and upgraded ground-based masts and allowed more equipment to be installed on existing structures.
Read the current limits from the Order as amended rather than from an older practice note. A scheme sized against pre-2022 figures either under-uses the right or exceeds it, and both mistakes cost time.
Three exclusions apply throughout. Rights are curtailed on article 2(3) land, which covers conservation areas, National Parks, National Landscapes, World Heritage Sites and sites of special scientific interest. Rights do not override listed building consent. And an Article 4 direction can withdraw them for a defined area.
When prior approval of siting and appearance is needed
Part 16 splits development into three groups. Some apparatus is permitted outright with no reference to the authority. Some requires the operator to apply for a determination as to whether prior approval of siting and appearance is required. Some falls outside the class and needs a full planning application.
The middle group is where most upgrades sit: new ground-based masts above the thresholds in the class, substantial increases to the height or bulk of an existing mast, and apparatus on article 2(3) land.
The scope of the authority's consideration is narrow and it is worth restating in the covering submission. Siting means where on the site, not whether the site is needed. Appearance means colour, finish, profile and screening. An officer's report that recommends refusal because coverage could be provided from a different village has strayed outside the class, and that is an appeal point rather than a negotiation.
The 56 day period and its consequences
The clock runs from the date the authority receives the application, the fee and the required particulars. Three outcomes follow.
- The authority notifies the operator that prior approval is not required, and the development may proceed as permitted development.
- The authority grants prior approval, usually with details of colour, finish and screening, and the development proceeds in accordance with it.
- The authority refuses prior approval, and the operator's remedy is an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.
If nothing happens within 56 days, the development may proceed. In practice that means an incomplete submission is the authority's best defence and the operator's biggest risk, because a dispute about whether the particulars were complete puts the start date of the period in doubt. Submit a complete pack, keep the submission receipt, and diarise day 56.
A short, factual covering letter helps. State the date of receipt, the class relied on, the limits in the class and the figures for the proposal, and the particulars supplied. An authority that can see the position clearly is more likely to determine inside the period.
Protected land and the stricter limits
On article 2(3) land the thresholds tighten, the appearance case gets harder and the consultation expectations go up.
Where the site is in a conservation area or affects the setting of a listed building, the authority is applying the duties in the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 to the siting and appearance decision. A Heritage Statement that identifies the affected assets, describes their significance and assesses the effect of the mast on that significance is the document that carries the case, and following Historic England's advice on statements of heritage significance keeps it in a form officers recognise.
In landscape designations the issue is the mast's prominence on a skyline and the cumulative effect with existing infrastructure. A Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment with wirelines or photomontages from agreed viewpoints does more than a paragraph asserting limited effect. Agree the viewpoints with the officer before producing the images.
The declaration of conformity
Every application must include a declaration that the equipment, in combination with other installations at the site, will conform to the public exposure guidelines of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection.
National policy is explicit that authorities should not set their own health safeguards and should treat the declaration as the end of the matter. That does not stop objections being made on health grounds, and it does not stop members raising them at committee. The practical answer is a declaration that is properly drawn, signed on behalf of the operator, references the site and the installation, and is accompanied by a plain-English note on cumulative exposure where the site is shared.
A Telecommunications Compliance document that gathers the declaration, the equipment schedule and the cumulative position in one place is easier for an officer to report than three separate attachments. Councils expect a suitably qualified author for the technical content, and radio frequency exposure work belongs with a competent radio engineer, so professional review is strongly advised.
Design, sharing and the evidence that answers objections
National policy expects applications to be supported by evidence that the operator has considered using an existing mast, building or other structure, and the absence of that evidence is the most common substantive weakness in a submission.
Set it out as a short options appraisal: the sites and structures considered, the radio reason each was discounted, and the search area with the candidate shown on it. Keep the radio planning explanation readable. An officer who cannot follow why a shared mast 400 metres away does not work will report that sharing has not been demonstrated.
On design, the options that tend to succeed are a slimmer monopole in place of a lattice tower, antennas within a shroud rather than on exposed headframes, a dark or recessive finish chosen for the backdrop rather than a default grey, cabinets grouped and set behind planting, and a pole positioned against an existing vertical element such as a tree group or a gable.
An illustrative case: replacing a 15 metre lattice mast in a village edge location with a taller slimline monopole, antennas shrouded, finished in a dark green, with the cabinet compound moved behind an existing hedge and two new semi-mature trees. The height goes up and the visual effect goes down. Those figures are indicative rather than a standard.
Street siting, footways and clutter
Masts and cabinets in the highway raise questions the planning officer will pass to the highway authority: footway width retained past the apparatus, visibility at junctions and accesses, sightlines for drivers emerging, and the cumulative clutter of existing poles, signs and boxes.
Keep a clear footway width that works for a wheelchair or a double buggy and show it on a dimensioned plan. Where the proposal sits near a crossing or a bus stop, show the relationship. Street works in the highway also need the separate consents under the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 and the Highways Act 1980, which are not part of the prior approval.
A complete prior approval pack is short: a location plan, a site plan with dimensions, elevations of the existing and proposed apparatus, a photomontage or wireline from agreed viewpoints, the options and sharing appraisal, the exposure declaration, and a Planning Statement that sets out the class relied on and addresses siting and appearance only. Anything that argues need is padding, and padding invites an officer to engage with the wrong question.
This is general guidance, not legal advice; check the position 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.
Frequently asked questions
What can a council consider on a Part 16 prior approval?
Siting and appearance only. It cannot refuse on the need for the network, on competition between operators, or on health grounds where a declaration of conformity with the recognised exposure guidelines has been supplied. An officer recommendation based on an alternative village or a different operator's coverage has strayed outside the class.
What happens after 56 days?
Where the authority has not determined the prior approval application within 56 days of receiving the application, the fee and the required particulars, the development may proceed. That makes a complete submission and a dated receipt important, because a dispute about whether the particulars were complete puts the start of the period in question.
Who can use Part 16 permitted development rights?
Only an electronic communications code operator, or someone acting on its behalf, and only for the purposes of the operator's network. Operator status derives from the electronic communications code in Schedule 3A to the Communications Act 2003. An applicant without that status has to apply for full planning permission instead.
Do the rights apply in a conservation area?
They are curtailed. Conservation areas, National Parks, National Landscapes, World Heritage Sites and sites of special scientific interest are article 2(3) land, where the thresholds tighten and prior approval is more often required. The rights do not override the need for listed building consent, and an Article 4 direction can remove them.
What is the declaration of conformity?
A signed statement that the equipment, together with other installations at the site, will comply with the public exposure guidelines of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. National policy says authorities should not impose their own health safeguards. Where the site is shared, add a short note explaining the cumulative position.
Does mast sharing have to be evidenced?
Yes. National policy expects applications to show that the operator has considered existing masts, buildings and other structures. Present it as a short options appraisal naming each structure considered, the radio reason it was discounted, and a search area plan with the candidate site marked, in language an officer can follow.
Sources and further reading
This article is general guidance about the planning system in England and, where stated, the rest of the UK. It is not legal or professional advice. Check your local planning authority’s validation requirements and take professional advice for your specific site.