Mast proposal returns with planners poised to say no again

A fresh attempt to put a mobile phone mast on the roof of a block of flats is due to go before councillors next week and is recommended for refusal.

EE and Three want to site cabinets, dishes and antennas on the roof of St Margaret’s, in High Street, Rottingdean, because masts were removed from the roof of the neighbouring White Horse Hotel during a refurbishment.

A report to Brighton and Hove City Council’s Planning Committee recommended refusal, saying that the masts would be “highly visible” causing “unwelcome visual clutter” on the roof of the locally listed art deco flats.

The Planning Committee refused a previous application by eight votes to two in December 2024.

The applicant – Mobile Broadband Network Limited (MBNL), a joint venture between EE and Three – appealed.

But its appeal was dismissed last July because the masts would be an “incongruous feature at roof level and would punctuate the skyline”.

In the new application, MBNL said that it had addressed the concerns cited by the council and the planning inspector who handled the appeal. The firm said that it had also considered alternative sites in Rottingdean.

MBNL said in its application: “The design has been amended in direct response to feedback received during the previous application and appeal process.

“The revised proposal incorporates a shroud design to help camouflage the installation and reduce its visual prominence, ensuring the development remains sympathetic to its surroundings and St Margaret’s Court’s locally listed building status.

“The proposal has also been carefully designed to integrate effectively with the existing building, resulting in a discreet and well-considered solution that further minimises visual impact.”

Rottingdean Parish Council has objected to the plans but noted that the design was “less intrusive” than the previous offering.

The parish council said: “It is acknowledged that the provided photo montage shows that this would look less intrusive than the previous application.

“However, from the higher vantage points further east and west of where these photos were taken, the perimeter shroud would be overlooked, resulting in visual clutter.”

Brighton and Hove City Council’s planning conservation team also objected because of the cumulative effect of the proposals on the Rottingdean Conservation Area and views towards the grade II listed Rottingdean Windmill.

The proposal attracted seven comments in support and 32 objections.

One anonymous objector, whose details were redacted by the council, said: “Having one mast on the roof of the original Solarium has caused damage and deterioration to the building with constant humming and banging from poor maintenance by the operating company.