CONTROVERSIAL plans to sight eight new mobile phone masts across Northfied, Frankley, Longbridge and Rubery have been unveiled this week.

And, what residents in the area will find more worrying, is that an estimated further 200 masts are set to flood Birmingham later this year.

Of the eight proposed for South Birmingham, four are located in Northfield on the roof of Home Bargains, Bristol Road South, Frankley Reservoir, Frankley Lane and Bournville College, Bristol Road South.

Two in Rubery on Great Park Complex and Rushmore House, Cock Hill Road with a further two in Longbridge on EME Rednal, Longbridge Lane and the electricity sub-station, Tessal Lane.

The final one in Frankley is located on the corner of Frogmill Road and Tay Road.

Birmingham City Council pulls in £641,000 a year from contracts with 13 mast operators including T-Mobile, O2 and Hutchison 3G.

T-Mobile and 3G have told the city council planning department they were looking for a further 91 locations, but in many cases residents would not be aware that a site was on their doorstep.

There has been increased public concern about the safety of masts and, while experts admit there is too little research available to confirm their safety, anti-mast campaigners claim the electro-magnetic emissions can cause cancer, nausea and fatigue.

Despite the fears, the companies insist the technology is not a danger to people's health and with more than 50million UK mobile phone users say they are reacting to consumer demand.

The Standard reported back in November how Northfield Conservative parliamentary candidate Vicky Ford was campaigning for a change in current legislation to make it more difficult for providers to put masts up. Currently, because mobile phone masts are deemed as a necessity, they are exempt from normal planning guidelines.

A spokesperson for Birmingham City Council said: "The policy concerning telecommunications mast on city council land or buildings is currently under consideration by a scrutiny committee.

"A report is expected to go to City Council in June." But she added that many of the decisions on masts are taken by central Government.


From Mast Network

02 must really be pushing out the boat, as it is all about 02! Were the company a late starter or is it something they said or did?

Victory for phone mast protesters

SENIOR councillors have backtracked on a decision to give mobile phone giant O2 the go-ahead to put up a mobile phone mast in Barrowcliff. Scarborough Council's cabinet originally agreed to lease council-owned land to the phone company so it could give signal coverage for next generation mobile phones.

But a council scrutiny committee "called in" the decision because it wanted to find out more and was not satisfied by assurances that people's health would not be put at risk.

Members recommended the cabinet review its original decision, and yesterday's meeting of senior councillors agreed not to go ahead with the leasing arrangement with O2.

Cllr Dave Billing, who put forward the motion recommending a cabinet change of heart, said: "I believe the cabinet was insensitive given the public health fears and and the possible effect on the young people.

"To select a site next to a play area, a playing field, two schools and a children's centre just strikes me as incredibly complacent.

"A neighbourhood development officer is encouraging people to become involved.

"If you are trying to encourage community activity there you don't put something there that's going to put fear in parents' minds about their safety."

Jane Mortimer, cabinet member for housing, land and property, said: "I'm not pushing it against ward members' wishes.

"If they don't want it there they will have it somewhere else and so be it.

"People want to use phones and have phones but don't want the masts, and that is a problem. We have to take a precautionary approach."

Environmental health boss Andy Skelton said: "We are still in an era where the effects of mobile phone masts are uncertain."

Cllr Phil McDonald first brought the O2 application to the attention of residents in January after it appeared no-one had been consulted.

He and four other independent councillors prompted the call-in decision.

Many residents were unconvinced by O2's claim there was no risk to people's health in siting a mast near homes, allotments, a children's play park, a family centre and two schools, and launched a petition which dozens of people signed.

O2 wants to put up a mast to give signal coverage for the next generation mobile phones which allow video messaging and internet use.

It does not need permission to put up the 12.5-metre imitation telegraph pole because it is below the height requiring a decision by councillors and cannot legally be refused.

However, as the proposed site was on council-owned land the council had to make a decision about whether or not to allow its land to be used.

16 March 2005


From Mast Network

http://tinyurl.com/57dv3


From Mast Network

09:38 - 17 March 2005

West councillors yesterday urged their counterparts across the region to impose a 50-metre exclusion zone for mobile phone masts near schools and homes. Gloucestershire County Council's ruling Labour and Liberal Democrat cabinet, backed by Tory councillors, voted to continue its policy on siting masts away from where people live and work because of health concerns. It wants the Government to look again at the rules on placing masts.

The move comes after evidence given at yesterday's meeting by campaigner Lynne Edmunds on the possible health risks posed by masts.

The council has had an increasing number of applications from private companies to erect third generation (3G), masts on land it owns.

Council leader Peter Clarke said: "We know that this is an issue of great public concern and feel it is our responsibility to urge other councils to adopt appropriate policies in light of the latest evidence." Deputy leader Liz Boait said: "The siting of masts needs to be considered as a matter of urgency which is why we have agreed to write to the Government to express our concerns." The cabinet resolved to refer the consideration of masts to its scrutiny management committee.


From Mast Network

by Adrian Short, Weekly News

Mar 17 2005

RESIDENTS who fought tooth and nail to block a planned mobile phone mast in Widnes have praised Halton council planning chiefs for rejecting it. Halton Borough Council turned down an application by 02 Ltd for a telecommunications mast with equipment cabins which the company had earmarked for land on Birchfield Road and Derby Road.

Councillors on the development control committee voted against the mast proposal which has already been thrown out on two previous occasions.

Phil McClean, a leading anti-mast campaigner, said: 'We are delighted that Halton council planners have refused the mast and we are disgusted that 02 showed disregard for the wishes of the residents and has not responded to the letters I sent to them. 'It is hard to say whether the company will reapply but the residents will continue to resist and will fiercely oppose any future applications. '02 should give more thought to the location of its mast, preferably an industrial area should be chosen, but this appears to be a more expensive option

- Ignored: because of higher business rates.

'They are making millions and yet they are penny-pinching.'

A spokeswoman for Halton council said: 'The council has perhaps been more rigorous than most local authorities in efforts to resists the introduction of inappropriate and unnecessary telecommunications equipment. 'The authority has had a long standing policy that adopts all of the precautionary advice given by the Government and the Stewart Report and in addition sets out the criteria that ensures the best environ-mental option is achieved when a proposal is submitted. 'The stringent application of this policy has seen the council turn down numerous intended proposals before they reach the public domain and reject a number of others at planning application stage.'

Residents across Widnes have become vocal opponents of mobile phone masts and are backing calls by Halton Friends of the Earth and UK campaign group Mast Sanity for a moratorium. Mast Sanity is now urging communities to make compensation claims for 'injurious affection' when a mast affects land usage or devalues properties. Mast Sanity is also demanding changes to planning policy to reflect the widespread view of residents across the UK that masts are a potential source of ill health, especially near sensitive locations like schools and residential property. Under the current planning system alleged potential health effects from masts are regarded as 'non-material considerations' which are largely ignored.


From Mast Network

BY DAVID MACAULAY
WESTMINSTER CORRESPONDENT

12:00 - 17 March 2005
A bill which would bring mobile phone masts under strict planning controls is due to be discussed in Parliament tomorrow amid claims it is easier to get planning permission for a base station than a household porch. The Telecommunications Mast (Planning Control) Bill is a Private Member's Bill introduced by Lib-Dem MP Andrew Stunell.

It has all-party support and sponsors from the three main parties, but may not get sufficient parliamentary time to be discussed.

Concerns about the potential health effects of mobile phone mast emissions prompted the Echo to launch its Shock Waves campaign, which calls for more thorough research to be carried out and urges a cautious approach to be taken towards planning applications for masts.

More than 700 Exeter residents have signed a petition urging phone giant Vodafone not to pursue an application to install a mast in Heavitree Road, close to schools, a nursery and the city's maternity hospital.

Mr Stunell's Bill would make future mast planning applications subject to a 'precautionary principle' statement, in line with the recommendations of the 2000 report by Government adviser Sir William Stewart.

The proposed legislation would do away with permitted development rights, ending the current practice meaning masts under 15m high are exempt from planning controls. The Bill would also require that for every application, the telecommunications company should set out a statement on the intensity and direction of the signal radiating from the proposed mast.

Where the beam of greatest intensity would fall on schools, other educational buildings or land, medical facilities or homes, then, in certain circumstances, this would provide automatic grounds for the refusal of planning permission. At the moment, health concerns are not a legitimate planning concern and so should not be taken into account by planning authorities.

Lib-Dem culture spokesman Don Foster said there was growing public concern about laws which meant masts under 50ft high were exempt from planning rules when minor alterations to most homes were subject to the planning process.

He said: "This Bill will allow planning authorities to take account of health concerns and will require the industry to produce more evidence about the radiation emitted, and to justify the need for each mast.

"The Conservatives created a terrible situation where it's easier to get planning permission for a mobile phone mast than it is for a porch.

"This needs to be addressed. So far Labour has chickened out, yet public concern continues."

http://www.thisisexeter.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=137015&command=displayContent&sourceNode=136999&contentPK=12051779&moduleName=InternalSearch&keyword=MPS%20SET%20TO%20DEBATE%20ON%20MAST%20RULES&formname=sidebarsearch


From Mast Network

Our chest cannot already support the acute and sharp pain that presses filled lungs of rage, before the threatening shade that blossoming on many of our schools. With the formulation of the function Delta, Rose Montero tried to explain faces of spirit like love, the jealousy and the lack of affection.

With the formula of the theory of relativity, Einstein connected the dimensions space and time. Some formulas are of difficult and so complex understanding that the reach and natural understanding move away of of those who do not have a technical preparation specifically. However, there are laws that govern a so evident correlation that it is not other people's for anybody. That is the case of the correlations that preaches the FREIBURGER APPEAL
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/566350/: "clear temporary and space relation between the appearance of... ailments and the beginning of an irradiation of microwaves that appears of different forms: installation of antennas of movable telephony in the proximity of the patients..." The referred affirmation that was born as manifest of 22 facultative Germans counts already with more than 3000 doctors than subscribes it (Helsinki Appeal 2005
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/460260/ - January of 2005). Then, with the aid of the World-wide Organization of the Health we are at readiness to design the formula of the confirmed suspicion, the statistical formula of the leukemia. The data of the OFFICIAL sanitary source par excellence say to us that in the industrialized countries occur annually, 4 cases of infantile leukemia each 100,000 children (Web of the WHO: http://www.who.int/home-page/index.es.html). If a school that can have between 400 or 500 students would have it difficult to enter the statistic with a case of leukemia, how can the statistic of the Meeting of Castile and Leon explain the occurrence of 4 cases in the same school. We are not expert but some thing we learned from the double language of many technical and scientific politicians and assumptions that they demonstrate every day to us who do not know to add two and two.

With the help of an article published by Ignasi Sivillà Llobet that we enclosed, it will be necessary to tell us on some antecedent data to establish our formula: - Cases of infantile leukemia happened or cerebral tumor. - Pupils who welcome the Center. Starting with the data of the WHO, we know that 4 cases of infantile leukemia by each 100,000 children are the same 1 case by each 25000 children. So and as it studied by Jordi Sivillà: "·The probability that in the School Garci'a Quintana (counting a number of students considered of 455 children) a case in a given year took place is: 1/(25000/455) = 1/54,9·The probability that in the School Garci'a Quintana two cases in a given year took place is: 1/(54,9x54,9)=1/3.020·The probability that three cases took place is: 1(54,9x54,9x54,9)= 1/165.740·The probability that four cases took place is: 1/54,94 = 1/9,114,113 "Which is the probability that coincident leukemia cases of or infantile cancer in a population of about 35,000 inhabitants like figuered occurs to 3? Which is the probability that they occur in a same School - Esculàpies Paula Montal -, that can lodge 150 students hardly? What probability had that it occurred only to a case in the School San Vicente Paúl of Cartagena? And of which two occurred? And up to three cases? What probability had that a case in the School Gerónimo Belda de Cieza occurred only? And of which two occurred? And up to three cases? What probability had that a case occurred in the School Madre de Dios de Jerez or in the School Los Robles en Aravaca (Madrid) or four cases in the School Peñagolosa de Burriana (Castellón)? What probability had that they occurred up to eight cases in Saint Cyr l'Ecole (Yvelines to the west of Paris)? Then the French Ministry of Health speech of "chance" (EUROPE PRESS, 4/2/05). No chance can justify the allowed ignorance of the sanitary authorities. Their own accounts make our readers and reach the conclusions that seem to them more founded. And, just in case, ask the following question: Which is the probability that cases of leukemia or infantile tumor in a School with next antennas take place? Highest! Because the data have been in charge to turn the wet paper statistic of the World-wide Organization of Health in very evident way will have to review the inexact. Association of Neighbors Against Injurious Radiations of L'Escala avecorn@hotmail.com 16/03/2005 Note. - The present article is an opinion. Certain. But the reality of which it is spoken is as exact as the theorem of Pitagoras that many neighbors apply to know the height of the imaginary pyramid which form the antennas that threaten their dreams. The statistic and leucemias I write for daros an argument on the subject of the danger of the electromagnetic waves of the telephony antennas. This argument is very powerful since it is based on a statistic that everybody can verify, and that throws by the ground all the declarations of governments, companies of telecommunications, etc, saying that there are no conclusive results. Starting point: According to the WHO in the western countries it occurs annually, 4 cases of infantile leukemia each 100,000 children. (Web of the WHO: http://www.who.int/home-page/index.es.shtml).·In the school Garci'a Quintana of Valladolid, with 455 students, an with an antenna surrounding, occurred 4 cases of leukemia in a year.·In the school of Escolàpies de Figueres, occurred in a year, 3 cases. The number of students I do not know. We will suppose that there are the same number of students (455). (Serious desirable to know this data to be more trustworthy).·In all the State there will be approximately 6000 schools of this type. Also it would be desirable to know the number exact. Statistical demonstration: 4 annual cases each 100,000, mean a case each 25.000.·The probability that in the school Garci'a Quintana a case in a given year took place is of 1/(25000/455) = 1/54,9·The probability that two cases took place is of: 1/(54,9x54,9)=1/3.020·The probability that three cases took place is of: 1(54,9x54,9x54,9)=1/165.740·The probability that four cases took place is of: 1/54,94 = 1/9,114,113 means clearly that the four cases have not been fortuities. In any case as the news also would have come to the public light if the case were in a leonine or frontier school, we must tell that in all the state there are many schools and the possibilities that in one or another one happens this, increases. Therefore we must consider the number of schools that here are in Spain. Supposing that there are 6000 schools we would have to divide the result by the number of schools, which gives us 1/(9.114.113/6000)=1/(1.519) That is, is a probability between 1,519 that in determined year, in some school of the Spanish State, at random, there are four cases of leukemia. To this, another case has been added. Now in the school of Escolàpies de Figueres, with three cases. Such making numbers as before, the probability of being an accident in this school is from 1 to 165.740. Divided by 6,000, it gives 1 to 27,6. But considering of which both cases have occurred in the course of a year, it is much more improbable that one takes place at random. The product of results both found will give the solution: 1/(1.519 x 27.6) = 1/41.924. Therefore, only there is a possibility between 41,929 that it is fruit of the chance. It is evident that there is something in these schools that have induced their students to contract the disease. ...

Kindly, Ignasi Sivillà Llobet
http://www.grn.es/electropolucio/00document.htm


Translation Spanish-English: omega

Having seen that T Mobile are trying to get a mast up in Heaton Mersey, I'd just like to say that I and a large group of Whalley Range residents in Manchester are trying to fight T mobile's decision to site a mast on the grounds of whalley range football club. Just like the case in Heaton Mersey, the site concerned is bordered by houses with lots of young children and the field itself is used by children.

I was told by the planning officer in charge of this case that he had met with T Mobile yesterday and that T Mobile had said that they were going ahead with their plans despite their being so much local opposition. Basically they are not interested in what people think. More worryingly T Mobile told the planning office that they would take Manchester city council to court if they refused the application. This sounds like bully tactics to me.

I would like information from anyone as to do what to do next. The mast concerned does not need formal planning permission as it would be 14.8 metres in height. Does anyone know of solicitors who specialise in these cases who would be able to offer their services free of charge.

Also I am trying to get in touch with the group of campaigners in Tameside who successfully appealed against Tameside council's decision to allow a mast.

Please email me at: nationalphobic@btconnect.com

Thanks

Nicky Lidbetter, Senior Manager, National Phobics Society
Zion Community Resource Centre, 339 Stretford Road, Hulme
Manchester, M15 4ZY, Tel: 0870 7700 456, Fax: 0161 227 9862
Email: nationalphobic@btconnect.com
Website: http://www.phobics-society.org.uk

--------

Nicky,

I refer to our previous exchanges of 23 February to 1 March. As I recall it, Manchester City Council told your group that "they could do nothing to prevent the T-Mobile development going through". Following advice, you challenged this line and the planning authority recognised that an application for Prior Approval was (is) required. We left matters awaiting submission of that application.

It is completely unsurprising that the operator is going forward despite the strong local opposition. That said, I would be astonished if T-Mobile really has threatened court action if the application is refused; - this is vexatious and any paper notification of this intent would be a powerful tool in the hands of the Council's solicitor. I have to wonder if this is scaremongering by the said planning officer.

Whatever the facts, this should in no way affect the due planning process in accordance with law. If such an application is refused by the relevant Council planning committee, T-Mobile will have 6 months in which to lodge an appeal. Should it do so, this appeal will be heard by an Inspector appointed by the Planning Inspectorate in Bristol who will decide whether to "allow" or "dismiss" it. If the Inspector dismisses such an appeal, then T-Mobile may decide to take the matter to the High Court - in which case the legal action will be between T-Mobile on the one hand and the First Secretary of State (on behalf of the Planning Inspectorate) on the other. This represents the due process.

At 14.8 metres, the mast requires a determination of Prior Approval and there is a well-established procedure for this. There is little point in contacting a solicitor at this stage - there is nothing for him to do.

As regards Thameside, the public did not appeal - the public have no right to do so. In the interests of accuracy, the mast was refused by committee (no doubt as a result, in part, of campaign pressure); T-Mobile lodged an appeal against the decision which the Planning Inspector dismissed.

Please come back to me as soon as the application is submitted.

Regards.

David Baron


From Mast Network

Phone mast row at caravan park

OWNERS of a caravan park on Hayling fear tourists will desert them if a mobile phone mast is allowed. Vodafone wants to put up a 33ft mast in Fishery Lane to boost its coverage on the island. Businesses and homes in the area are furious after being sent letters telling them about the application. They are worried about radiation from the mast – and fear tourists will not want to bring their children to the island if they know the mast is there.

If the mast gets the go-ahead it will go up in Fishery Lane, between Hayling Recycling Centre and Fishery Creek Caravan Park. Darko Emersic, owner of Fishery Creek, has consulted solicitors and says he is prepared to fight the firm all the way. Vodafone's application to Havant Borough Council is to determine if it needs to apply for planning permission for the structure.

Jane Frapwell, of Vodafone, said better mobile phone coverage might even encourage people to visit the campsite.'

16 March 2005

From Mast Network

I have just finished a paper "Observations re EMR Pollution, EHS, and the Problems of the use of the ICNIRP Guidelines in Ireland" aimed at the Irish State legislature (Dail Eiranne) in view of the current serious problems over here with EHS. (dja.) [Dave J. Aldridge]

http://tinyurl.com/44ttp