The overall decision in the report said it would need prior approval and is refused.
A prior approval ensures a project is only being judged against fixed legal requirements instead of a council’s criteria and requirements.
In the report it said: “The proposed mast and associated equipment by virtue of its siting, height, appearance and prominent location would have an undue negative impact on the visual amenity of the immediate landscape and would cause less than substantial harm to settings of important designated heritage assets.
“Furthermore, it is concluded that said harm has not been proven to be necessary or outweighed by public benefits. Therefore, control is to be exercised over the siting and design of the proposal and it is recommended that the prior approval of the siting and appearance of the development is required and refused. It is also noted that other alternative sites for the development have not been explored.”
The NCC recommendation said: “The proposed mast and associated equipment by virtue of its siting, height, appearance and prominent location would have an undue negative impact on the visual amenity of the immediate landscape and would cause less than substantial harm to settings of important designated heritage assets. Furthermore, it is concluded that said harm has not been proven to be necessary or outweighed by public benefit as it is considered a less harmful site could be identified, however, no further sites have been investigated or put forward for consideration under this application. As a result, it is considered that the proposal is contrary to Policies QOP 1, ENV 1, ENV 3, ENV 7, ENV 9 and ICT 1 of the Northumberland Local Plan and the principles of the NPPF.”