Subject: URGENT Update & Next Steps: Burbage Mast Campaign - We Need Your Help!
Dear Supporters,
Thank you for your unwavering support and for signing the petition concerning the telecommunications mast (planning application 24/00689/TGDO) situated at the corner of Rugby Road and Sketchley Road, right next to Sketchley Hill Primary School. Your voice has been crucial, and we want to share an important update on our formal complaint to Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council.
Unfortunately, the Council has responded stating that they do not uphold our complaint regarding the procedural handling and public consultation for this mast.
Summary of the Council's Position:
In essence, the Council's decision is based on the following:
"Prior Approval" Limitations: They state the mast falls under a 'prior approval' application process, which significantly limits their scope for assessment. They argue that government legislation (the General Permitted Development Order 2015) effectively grants planning permission for such masts, subject only to this narrow assessment.
Consultation Deemed "Adequate": The Council believes they met the minimum legal requirements for consultation by displaying a site notice (18th July 2024) and sending letters to some adjoining neighbours (16th July 2024), including Sketchley Hill Primary School. While acknowledging the school's objection, they do not agree the school was unable to engage effectively. They also stated they have no control over when applications are submitted, even if this falls within school holidays, and cannot delay consideration.
Visual Impact & Public Opposition: While acknowledging the visual impact and the strength of public opposition (including our well-supported petition), the Council states these factors cannot override the legislative requirements, which they believe they have met.
No Power to Rescind or Turn Off: The Council has made it clear that the planning permission cannot be rescinded, and they have no lawful means to remove the mast or require it to be turned off.
Our Ongoing Concerns – Why This Isn't Good Enough:
Despite this setback, we are far from defeated. We believe the Council's response highlights fundamental flaws in the system, especially when developments are so close to our children:
Inadequate Consultation, Especially for a School:
Simply meeting "minimum legislative requirements" is not acceptable for a mast placed directly adjacent to a primary school. The potential impact on a place of learning and children's well-being demands a far more robust and sensitive consultation.
Sketchley Hill Primary School, representing hundreds of children, formally objected. It is deeply concerning that this significant objection appears to have been procedurally sidelined due to the restrictive nature of the 'prior approval' system.
The government's own "Code of Practice for Wireless Network Development in England" outlines specific circumstances where schools must be consulted, underscoring their importance. While the school was notified, we firmly believe the spirit of such guidance requires genuine, weighty consideration of a school's concerns, not just a tick-box exercise.
Furthermore, best practice planning guidance from other councils (like Southwark Council) explicitly states that telecommunications equipment should be sited "as far as practicably possible away from educational and community uses," and that operators "must avoid locations near sensitive sites." This is the kind of "special consideration" that should have been paramount here but seems to have been disregarded.
The timing of the consultation during school holidays significantly hampered the school community's ability to engage fully and collectively.
Dismissal of Overwhelming Community Opposition:
The Council acknowledged our petition and the strength of local feeling. However, their response suggests that under the current system, the clear voice of the community counts for very little when up against this type of permitted development. This is not local democracy in action.
Flawed "Prior Approval" Process:
This process appears to be a loophole that allows potentially impactful developments to proceed without full scrutiny of critical issues like the specific need for a mast in this exact location or a thorough, independent assessment of all potential impacts on a sensitive environment like a school.
This is NOT the End – Here’s What We Can Do Next:
We are not giving up. The Council's letter itself outlines the next step for us:
Escalate the Complaint: We have the right to request a review of the complaint. The letter states: "If you are not satisfied with this response or with how your complaint has been handled, you can request a review of the complaint by contacting Rebecca Owen, Democratic Services Manager in writing at the address below or by email to complaints@hinckley-bosworth.gov.uk". We are actively pursuing this option.
We Need YOUR Help More Than Ever:
This is a community effort, and your continued support is vital. Here’s how you can help:
Share Your Expertise: Do you have experience in planning law, local government, legal challenges, media relations, or environmental campaigning? Any skills or knowledge you can offer could be invaluable. Please reach out.
Stay Engaged & Spread the Word: Keep talking about this issue with your friends, neighbours, and local representatives. The more people who are aware and concerned, the stronger our collective voice becomes.
Join the Conversation: For the latest updates, discussions, and to connect with other concerned residents, please join our Facebook group: Burbage Community Action - Sketchley Hill Mast (Ref: 24/00689/TGDO) https://www.facebook.com/groups/3469793609819140/
We are determined to continue challenging this decision and to fight for a process that genuinely considers the well-being of our children and community. This mast, in this location, remains unacceptable.
Thank you for your continued passion and commitment. Together, we can make a difference.
I have pasted the exact wording of the councils response below:
Sincerely,
Sarah Vermeire
YOUR STAGE 1 COMPLAINT 2146
Thank you for bringing your complaint about the Development Management service to our
attention. Your complaint has been investigated at stage 1 of our complaints process.
1. Complaint definition
We have defined your complaint as:
You feel there has been procedural impropriety and inadequate public consultation
regarding planning application 24/00689/TGDO (5G Mast adjacent to Sketchley Hill
Primary School)
2. My decision on your complaint
Following consideration of the background to the complaint and information you provided, I
can confirm that I do not uphold the complaint.
3. Reasons for my decision
Your complaint relates to a telecommunications mast and associated cabinets and
ancillary works (“the mast”) erected on the corner of Rugby Road and Sketchley Road,
Burbage. The mast was the subject of an application for prior approval reference
24/00689/TGDO (“the prior approval application”) which was received 15 July 2024 and
prior approval given 11 September 2024.
Consultation Process
The Council is required to consult on prior approval applications. They must be publicised
to local residents by putting up a site notice or sending letters to adjoining neighbours
(Paragraph A3. 6 (d) of Schedule 2, Part 16 of the Town and Country Planning (General
Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015).
Please ask for: Ed Stacey
Direct Dial/Ext: 01455 255918
Email: edward.stacey@hinckley-bosworth.gov.uk
Your Ref:
Our Ref: Complaint 2146
Date: 14/05/2025
Hinckley Hub • Rugby Road • Hinckley • Leicestershire • LE10 0FR
Telephone 01455 238141 • MDX No 716429 • www.hinckley-bosworth.gov.uk
In respect of the prior approval application, a site notice was displayed on 18 July 2024
and the following adjoining neighbours were also notified via post on 16 July 2024: 1
Herald Way, Sketchley Hill Primary School, 2 Lance Close, 349 Rugby Road, Athena
House, Rugby Road. The combination of a site notice and neighbour notification letters
exceeded the legislative requirements and accorded with the Council’s Statement of
Community Involvement (2024). I note that the Primary School did receive a letter as they
objected to the proposal and do not agree that the school was unable to engage in this
consultation process. I appreciate that the timing of this consultation process fell outside of
term-time. However, the Council has no control over when the prior approval application
was submitted and the legislation does not allow for a delay in the consideration process
to respect school term-times. Given that officers accorded with legislative requirements in
respect of the consultation process, I am unable to uphold your complaint in this regard.
Visual impact
I sympathise with the visual impact this infrastructure has on you and your community. The
case officer of the prior approval application clearly and correctly sets out the process of
assessing this impact at paragraphs 8.0 – 8.14 of their report. The report is available here
and I agree with its conclusions, namely that while the mast will have visual impacts these
do not conflict with the relevant legislation. This is largely due to the specific nature of prior
approval applications and the limited ways in which they can be considered. Given that
officers accorded with legislative requirements in respect of assessing the visual impact of
the mast, I am unable to uphold your complaint in this regard.
Petition and Public Opposition
Similarly, I understand that many residents object to this development by signing a petition
and I cannot trivialise such a well-supported petition which clearly and demonstrably
purveys the feelings of those who live near the mast. However, the Government that
brought in this legislation in effect granted planning permission for this mast and many
others like it, subject to a limited and narrow assessment process that I have referred to
above. Unfortunately, the Council must accord with the relevant legislation and in doing so
may ultimately be unable to align such decision making with the expectations residents
have. Public opposition, however strong, cannot override the Local Planning Authority’s
legislative requirements which have been met. As such, I am unable to uphold your
complaint in this regard.
Tree Preservation Orders
The Council has not approved any works to trees in this location. Works to trees were not
included in the consideration of the application for the mast and I am not aware of any
application subsequently received for works to trees. Any works without permission would
therefore be unlawful but we do not currently have any evidence of unauthorised works
taking place. The Council will review any evidence if submitted. Notwithstanding this, the
Council’s complaints process cannot review the policies and procedures of a third party
and so I am unable to comment on Cornerstone’s approach to works to nearby trees.
4. Remedies
Your request for the investigation of the procedural handling of the prior approval
application has been carried out and detailed in this letter.
The mast has been granted planning permission by the General Permitted Development
Order 2015 and was granted prior approval by the Council in 2024. This permission cannot
Hinckley Hub • Rugby Road • Hinckley • Leicestershire • LE10 0FR
Telephone 01455 238141 • MDX No 716429 • www.hinckley-bosworth.gov.uk
be rescinded and the Council has no lawful means to remove or turn off the 5G mast or
request the developer resubmit another application.
Unfortunately, due to legislative requirements the Council’s Statement of Community
Consultation is not able to prevent applications for the prior approval of 5G masts being
consulted upon during school holidays only.
If you are not satisfied with this response or with how your complaint has been handled,
you can request a review of the complaint by contacting Rebecca Owen, Democratic
Services Manager in writing at the address below or by email to complaints@hinckley-
bosworth.gov.uk
Yours sincerely
Ed Stacey MRTPI
Planning Manager (Development Management)