Original article ISPreview UK:Read More
Broadband and mobile operator Virgin Media and O2 (VMO2) has today complained that “outdated planning rules” in the capital city have forced them to switch off “dozens of mobile sites” (not all at once), which they say often leaves busy areas “blighted by poor quality mobile coverage” (i.e. operators are “forced” to remove kit faster than they can replace it).
The situation typically starts with land or property owners who may be seeking to revamp a building that currently hosts mobile equipment. Such developers can serve a mobile operator with a ‘Notice to Quit‘, forcing them to remove their equipment within 18 months. “On average, it takes more than two years to replace a site, with some offline for more than seven years,” said VMO2.
Sadly, it’s often much harder in dense urban areas to find viable alternative sites nearby and then there’s the lengthy approval processes for sites that are suitable. “With just one in five planning departments across the UK fully staffed, delays in decision-making are leaving many areas without sufficient coverage,” complained the operator.
In addition, VMO2 highlights how many new developments are being built with little consideration of their impact on mobile connectivity. “Tall buildings may block existing masts and bring more people into an area” (hardly unusual in a city), almost all of whom will want to use their phone, but “developers aren’t required to assess how a project will impact mobile services or support operators to find alternative sites“.
The result, highlights VMO2, is that mobile connectivity in London now suffers from having fewer than seven 5G sites per 10,000 people, which they say leaves the capital “lagging behind other major cities“.
Professor Robert Joyce, Director of Mobile Access Engineering at O2, said:
“Mobile connectivity is critical to how people live and work but in London essential equipment is being removed faster than it can be replaced with planning rules pummelling mobile coverage in the capital. Mobile operators are being hit by a double whammy as developers force them to remove mobile equipment while also bringing more people into an area, all of whom rely on their phones.
With planning teams under real pressure, delays in approving replacement sites are having a direct impact on customer experience in parts of the capital which poses a real risk to London’s long term growth prospects.
This year, we’re investing more than £700m in our mobile network through our Mobile Transformation Plan. Planning rules must evolve so that this investment goes into building infrastructure and delivering a reliable network for customers – not into delays, fees and compromised site choices.”
The operator is now calling for “targeted changes to the planning system“, such as by ensuring the National Planning Policy Framework clearly prioritises telecommunications infrastructure as a driver of economic growth, alongside reducing the number of applications requiring full planning or prior approval to ease pressure on local authorities.
O2 also wants to see greater flexibility, such as by encouraging the use of rooftops, “particularly in conservation areas“, and increasing the number of antennas permitted under existing rules to enable faster 4G and 5G upgrades. But some of that may be a tougher sell for an already weakened government.
The focus above is primarily on tackling the problem via changes to the planning process for new sites. Since the reality here is that O2 can hardly expect to hold much sway over major property developments, particularly when they’re often paying only relatively small rental sums to the landowners.
However, O2 does believe that new property developments should also be required to consider their impact on mobile connectivity from the outset, ensuring appropriate infrastructure is incorporated early in the process to maintain and enhance coverage. This might at least help to balance against the loss of an existing site and make it easier to establish new ones.
The operator has submitted these policy proposals to Government as part of its National Planning Policy Framework consultation, with a response expected in the coming months. But as usual there’s always a trade-off between regulation, urban constraints, and competing public interests.
Mobile infrastructure isn’t installed in a vacuum and planning authorities have to consider public opinion, visual impact, safety and other factors etc. In that sense, O2’s point about planning authorities also suffering from a lack of resources may be a much bigger roadblock to overcome.