Rural concerns over telecom towers
Government proposals to improve rural connectivity have been met with a mixed reception, with some countryside campaigners welcoming the prospect of better coverage, while others fear a telecoms landgrab.
Proposed changes to the law would allow operators to build masts up to 30 metres high in unprotected rural areas. Networks would also be able to extend existing towers to 25 metres without prior approval, and erect new ‘monopole’ masts up to 15 metres high by merely notifying local authorities rather than applying for full planning consent (although stricter rules would protect National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and World Heritage Sites).
The CLA and the Countryside Alliance welcomed the plans as a positive step towards better rural connectivity. But some landowners who host digital infrastructure are concerned that these and other proposed reforms tilt the balance in favour of telecom companies, which they feel have had the upper hand since the introduction of the Electronic Communications Code in 2017.
“Routinely taken to court and unable to afford the exorbitant legal fees of defending themselves, site owners often feel forced to accept operators’ demands,” says Anna Turley of the
Protect & Connect Campaign, who points out that networks have requested rent reductions of up to 90%. A revision of the Electronic Communication Code, which underwent consultation in March, looks set to give networks even greater rights.
One proposal looks at introducing “retrospective legislation permitting operators’ rights to upgrade and share apparatus on leases entered into prior to December 2017”, according to Kenneth Munn of Savills. “This will cause concern to site providers, as they will have consensually agreed to one set of rights, only to have this overturned or added to.”
The Government is considering plans to speed up litigation and launch a network code of conduct. But, says Turley, these “fail to address the root cause of disagreements – the valuation mechanism. While this unfair system remains in place, delays to the roll-out of digital infrastructure will persevere.”