Telecoms masts and cabinets under Part 16

Most new telecoms masts never go through a planning application. Telecoms mast permitted development sits in Part 16 of Schedule 2 to the GPDO 2015, which allows electronic communications code operators to install apparatus for their networks subject to limits and conditions. For many masts the operator instead submits a prior approval notification, and the council can consider only two things: siting and appearance.

That is the fact to hold on to if you are a neighbour, a parish councillor or a junior officer reading the file. Health effects, property values and the operator's choice of technology are outside the decision. Where the mast goes and what it looks like are inside it.

What Part 16 Class A permits

Class A 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, including masts, antennas, equipment cabinets and the associated works.

Code operator status is the gateway. Rights under the Electronic Communications Code, which sits in the Communications Act 2003 as amended, attach to designated operators, and a party without that status has no Part 16 rights at all.

The class carries a long list of limits and conditions covering height, position, the size of cabinets and what may be done on protected land. Those limits were amended in 2022 to allow taller ground based masts, strengthening and heightening of existing masts, and wider deployment of cabinets, with lower thresholds applying on article 2(3) land. The figures have been changed more than once, so read the current consolidated text of Part 16 rather than a summary.

Two conditions apply throughout. Apparatus must be removed and the land restored when no longer needed for the operator's network, and the operator must minimise the effect of the development on the surrounding area as far as practicable.

Prior approval for siting and appearance

Certain Class A development, including most new ground based masts, may only proceed after the operator applies to the authority for a determination as to whether prior approval is required for the siting and appearance of the development.

The application comes with a plan, elevations and a description of the apparatus. The authority has 56 days from receipt to notify its determination. If it does not determine the application within that period, the operator may proceed in accordance with the submitted details, which is why these notifications are dealt with quickly and why a late objection is a wasted objection.

Siting and appearance is a narrow remit and a real one. Within it the authority can consider the visual effect of the mast in the street scene, its relationship to buildings and trees, the effect on a conservation area or a listed building's setting, landscape impact, the finish and colour of the structure, whether the cabinets obstruct a footway, and whether an alternative position on the same site would be less harmful.

What the authority cannot do is refuse because the community does not want a mast there at all, or because it prefers a different site outside the operator's control.

The ICNIRP declaration

Every Part 16 application is accompanied by a declaration that the equipment and installation, taken together with other installations at the site, is designed to be in full compliance with the requirements of the radio frequency public exposure guidelines of the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection.

National policy is clear that local planning authorities should not set health safeguards different from those guidelines and should not question the certificate. So a prior approval notification cannot be refused on health grounds, and an appeal on that basis will fail.

That frustrates objectors, and it is worth being straight about why the rule exists. The exposure limits are set nationally by reference to international guidance, and the planning system is not the forum in which they are reviewed. Concerns about the limits themselves belong with the bodies that set them.

Where a mast is proposed near a school or college, the operator's pre-application consultation under the code of practice for wireless network development is expected to include the school. That is a consultation obligation rather than a veto.

Designated land and where full permission is needed

On article 2(3) land, meaning conservation areas, National Landscapes, National Parks, the Broads and World Heritage Sites, Part 16 rights are more restricted, and some development that would be permitted elsewhere needs a full planning application.

Full permission is also needed wherever the limits of the class are exceeded, which in practice means an unusually tall mast, apparatus in a position the class does not allow, or works by a party without code operator status.

Listed building consent sits outside all of this. Attaching apparatus to a listed building requires consent under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 whether or not the works are permitted development, and a scheme fixing antennas to a church tower will need it. Scheduled monument consent works the same way.

Where a full application is required, the supporting case usually needs a planning statement addressing coverage need, site selection and the alternatives considered, plus visual assessment material. A telecommunications compliance report covers the ICNIRP position and the technical context, and councils usually expect an author with radio frequency engineering competence, with professional review strongly advised.

How to comment effectively

Prior approval notifications are publicised, usually by site notice and sometimes by neighbour letter. The 56 day clock is short, so act on the day you see the notice.

1. Get the reference number and read the submitted drawings, not the summary.
2. Write about siting and appearance. Name the viewpoint, the receptor and the harm: the view from the conservation area's principal street, the setting of a listed building, the loss of a street tree, a cabinet narrowing a footway below usable width.
3. Suggest a specific alternative position or design if you have one, because the authority can require a different siting within the site.
4. Send photographs taken from public vantage points, with the location of each marked on a plan.
5. Copy the parish or town council, which may make a formal representation.

Objections that lead with health, house prices or a general dislike of masts get recorded and carry no weight. Objections that describe a particular view and a particular harm sometimes change the siting.

Note: the operator can proceed if the authority misses the 56 day deadline, so pressing the case officer for an early determination is more useful than lodging a long objection on day 50.

Where this leaves communities

Part 16 is deliberately permissive, because network deployment is treated as national infrastructure delivered by private operators. The planning system controls its appearance rather than its existence.

The practical response is to engage at the pre-application stage, when the operator is still choosing between candidate sites, rather than after the notification arrives. Parish councils that build a relationship with the operators' agents get consulted on candidate sites. Those that wait for the notice get 56 days and a drawing.

This is general guidance, not legal advice. Check the position with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it.

If you are preparing supporting documents for a telecoms application, the full report index covers the planning statement and visual assessment reports, or start from a postcode on PlanScope. PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.