Farnham Today 03/06/05

JEREMY Hunt is calling on telephone company Orange to withdraw its proposals for a mast near Bourne Infant School . The MP for South West Surrey met with officials from Orange at the House of Commons on Tuesday to discuss their plans for a mast on Frensham Road . “I don’t like any of the masts they are proposing but the one near the school is a particular cause of concern,” said Mr Hunt. “What we have said to them is we would like them to withdraw their proposal for that particular mast. Their response is that they would give it careful consideration. But they didn’t say they would and that is why I am cautious. I would like to see the colour of their money,” he said. Niki Bradshaw, campaign co-ordinator for the Bourne School masts action group, was also in attendance at the meeting. She said: “I was reasonably happy about the meeting. We were pushing the point that they have to consult with us in the true sense of consultation as opposed to a public relations whitewash.” “The one good thing to come out of the meeting is that they have committed to reassess all of the sites and that they are going to take notice of the sensibilities of the school site,” she added. A spokesman for Orange denied the accusation that they had failed to consult with the local community about their plans for the mast. “It has been mentioned by various campaign groups that Orange has failed to consult with the Bourne School over its plans to erect a mast on the Frensham Road. “I can confirm that should Orange decide to proceed with this proposal we have every intention of consulting fully with the school. “The reason this was not done initially is because these proposals were simply outline plans and no formal plans have been submitted. “The drop in session was a pre-consultation exercise and was designed for us to get some feedback before we began full consultation.”

Chesterfield Today

People power looks set to cut off plans for a controversial mobile mast near homes in a mid-Derbyshire village.

Orange has planning permission from NE Derbyshire District Council to site a mast only 300 metres from a school in Wessington at Nethergreen Farm, Moorwood Moor Lane .

But after protests from villagers the landowners – four members of the Eason family – decided to put the matter to a public vote.

Fifty locals turned up at the Three Horseshoes Pub for a referendum on whether the mast should go ahead – and landlord Scott Brown said the answer was a resounding 'no'.

Mr Brown said: "The Easoms have been very good about this. They have said they will consider the views of the villagers.

"But they can't get back to us this week as they are silaging and cannot stop. We understand that, they have a business to run. We hope to hold a meeting with them very soon."

Last month Mr Brown vowed to leave the village if the 17m mast, with six antennae and four microwave dishes, was erected. He and other villagers were worried that the radiowaves were a health risk to the children.

Villagers were asked to vote whether to support the original plan, to choose from sites 400, 500 or 700 metres away from the school and village green or to decide not to have a mast at all. The villagers voted to do without a mast altogether.

Orange has planning permission from NEDDC to site the mast in the original position.

They and the landowners came up with a second possible site for the mast, the 400 metres option, but this has also been turned down by the villagers.

A spokeswoman for Orange said the mast conformed to strict government guidelines and no link between masts and ill-health had been established.

charlotte.white@derbyshiretimes.co.uk

02 June 2005

Haverhill Echo

Haverhill MP Richard Spring has written to the Planning Inspectorate, urging its officers to refuse an appeal by Hutchison 3G for a telecommunications mast at Hazel Stub roundabout.

Hutchison 3G is appealing against the decision by St Edmundsbury Borough Council's planning committee to refuse planning permission for the mast, which would support 3G mobile phones.
Nearby residents had fought a determined campaign against the mast.

In his letter, Mr Spring said: "I wish to personally oppose this appeal and hope that you will refuse it. It would certainly not be in the best interests of my constituents to allow the base station to go ahead." Mr Spring had previously shown his support for the residents' campaign, attending a rally in the town centre.

Residents are concerned about the potential health risks from siting a mast so close to properties and schools.

Mr Spring said: "I have never before witnessed so much vociferous objection to a planning application in my time as a Member of Parliament."

The appeal will be dealt with by a planning inspector, but it could go to a public inquiry.

02 June 2005

Jun 2 2005

Ayrshire Post

MOBILE phone masts are being put up next to people’s homes because they’re banned from council owned land, say Tory councillors.

And Troon councillor Peter Convery revealed this week that he’s taken his campaign for the ban to be relaxed all the way to the Scottish Parliament.

He insists that while more appropriate open spaces lie empty, masts are being erected just metres away from homes.

Councillor Convery explained: “By banning the use of council land for the purposes of telecommunications equipment, the council’s policy has forced mobile phone companies to target sites in close proximity to residential areas.

“In many instances the companies themselves would have preferred to locate their equipment on, for example, golf courses and other open spaces removed from residential properties.”

He added: “Two recent examples are the planning applications for 02 masts in Troon at Lochend Road and Kilmarnock Road , which provoked what in my view was a quite understandable level of concern and objection amongst local residents.

“Had the council’s moratorium policy not been in place, I believe that both of these facilities would have been sited in much more appropriate locations, nowhere near residential areas.

“While I clearly would not want to see a rash of mobile phone masts springing up across local parklands and golf courses, it equally does not seem sensible to close such locations off completely as an option, particularly when the alternative is for masts to end up being sited just meters from the homes of local residents.”

A motion by Councillor Convery and his Conservative group colleague, Councillor Alistair Kerr, calling on the moratorium to be reviewed was rejected at a recent meeting of South Ayrshire Council.

Councillor Convery went on: “ I decided to take the matter to the Scottish Parliament’s petitions committee, since I believe the parliament has a crucial role to play in helping ensure that there is clear guidance on how such moratoriums should be applied, to balance the need to roll out new telecommunications systems with the expressed concerns of local people.

“While the two recent cases in Troon have raised the profile of this issue locally, this is a problem that affects the whole of Scotland. I hope that by drawing it to the attention on the Scottish Parliament’s petitions committee, a sensible solution can be arrived at.”

The issue will be debated by the petitions committee when it holds its special sitting at Ayr ’s County Buildings on Monday, June 6.

Ilkley Gazette

Plans to site a phone mast opposite a Burley-in-Wharfedale housing estate are meeting with opposition from local people.

Residents of the Sandholme estate are said to be in a state of shock after discovering the plan for a strip of land opposite their homes.

And they claim they are in a catch 22 situation after being told they are not allowed to object on health grounds.

T Mobile has submitted a prior notification of the installation of a 15m mast with antennae, transmission dish and radio equipment at land north of Langroyd, on Bradford Road .

And local people have been told they have until Saturday, June 4, to get their views across.

Brian Garlick, who lives on Bradford Road "virtually next door" to the proposed site said he was one of just a handful of neighbours who received official notification of the plan from Bradford Council.

He now wants to make sure all the local residents are made aware of the application before the deadline passes.

He said: "It is absolutely shocking that this is planned for a thin strip of land opposite a housing estate. Everyone I have spoken to is in a state of shock really"

Mr Garlick said he was concerned about the possible health risks, and he argued that the mast should be sited away from housing estates - preferably in a position with fields on both sides of the road.

He stressed: "There are mixed feelings from the experts, and until we absolutely know for sure we should err on the side of caution."

But he added: "If they are blasé enough to build next to schools what hope is there."

Mr Garlick claims many people in Burley are unaware of the plan or unsure of the proposed location.

He stressed: "I want to raise people's awareness on this issue. It is not just a rumour anymore - it is actually happening.

Mr Garlick says he has been told the council's planning department can only consider objections on planning grounds such as car parking and traffic - and that objections on health grounds will not be valid.

He stressed: "What annoys me is that they say you cannot argue about it on the grounds of health - but as we have tried to point out they are the very grounds everyone wants to oppose it on. It is like a catch 22 situation."

His neighbour Dr Barbara Metcalfe is objecting to the plan on the grounds of traffic problems and safety.

Dr Metcalfe, a research biologist, said it was already extremely difficult and potentially dangerous to turn onto Bradford Road from the Sandholme estate. She believes this problem will be exacerbated by the siting of a mast on the corner.

She said: "Anything that is put on the bend of the road will obstruct the view. It is hellish getting out onto Bradford Road already."

Burley Community Council Chairman Bruce Speed said BCC was aware of the proposed mast and its exact position was being checked.

He added: "Our view is that it should not be immediately opposite the end of Sandholme Drive , because of the traffic danger from its layby when service vehicles are parked. It should be at the North end of the Staithe away from the junction."

He added: "It would have been better on the existing mast on the old Otley Road , shared with the existing user, but we heard that had been rejected."

Mr Garlick is asking anyone who wants to comment on the plan to write to the Senior planner Martynn Burke, at Ilkley Town Hall , Ilkley LS29 8HB, or e-mail martyn.burke@bradford.gov.uk.

The application number is 05/03123/PNT.

This is Kidderminster

ANGRY residents battling plans to put three mobile phone masts on the same Kidderminster site say the area is in danger of becoming a "dumping ground" for masts.

A 12 metre monopole has already been put up on the Charlie Brown site in Stourport Road, shocking many neighbouring householders, who had not realised planning permission had been granted when it appeared.

They were horrified to discover - just days later - that two separate applications had been submitted to Wyre Forest District Council to build another two masts on the same land.

One of the proposals, for a 15 metre Hutchinson 3G mast, will be discussed at the district council's planning and environmental control committee meeting on Tuesday and residents are desperately trying to make their fears known in the meantime.

Stourport Road resident, Anita Gallagher, whose husband, Tony, will address councillors to explain the opposition to the plan, said householders had formed a group called Communities Against Mobile Masts and filled their windows with posters saying "Say No To Masts".

Gloucester Echo

14:52 - 02 June 2005

Church leaders at St Philip and St James' in Leckhampton are planning to put a mobile phone mast in the tower. The church council has provisionally agreed to the request from QS4 Ltd.

The church, which would receive an annual fee for hosting the equipment, believes the mast would be less of an eyesore inside the building than outside.

It says there is a need for a mast in Leckhampton because there is poor network coverage in the area.

Residents and councillors are dismayed.

Borough councilllor Robin MacDonald (Leckhampton, Con) attacked the move.

He said: "I don't agree with it. There are a lot of residents around there and I hope they consult with them.

"Putting it in the tower doesn't destroy the health hazards. It will still have radiation coming out of it."

He added: "The need for money is up to the church.

"But it would be a shame if they put that before people in the area."

The vicar, the Rev Canon Peter Chicken, said he was aware it was a sensitive issue.

He said: "The church council gave it a great deal of thought and was unanimous in giving it approval.

"Having examined the facts we were convinced that the risks to health and safety were minute. We take our responsibilities to the community very seriously."

Mr Chicken said the church intends to use the income to further its work with children and young people in the parish.

He added that there will be no final decision on whether the project will go ahead for at least three months, and there will be an opportunity for concerns or objections to be heard.

Gloucester Echo

10:30 - 02 June 2005

Enforcement officers stepped in to stop mobile phone giant O2 working on a mast built in the wrong place in Warden Hill.

Residents bombarded Cheltenham Borough Council with complaints when they realised engineers were connecting the mast in Shurdington Road to the mains. In March, the borough council warned O2 it was building the mast in the wrong place, but work continued.

The installation is 9.5m closer to the bus stop than approved.

The company submitted a retrospective planning application and has been running the mast off a generator ever since.

But on Tuesday residents spotted workmen trying to connect the mast to mains electricity. They rang the council in their droves to complain.

Planning enforcement officers moved in at 4pm and told the workmen to stop.

Grahame Lewis, Cheltenham Borough Council's assistant director for the built environment, said: "Work has been halted until members of the planning committee have had an opportunity to decide upon the application.

"It's extremely annoying that the company has opted to undertake this work at this time, and we'll do all we can to make sure it complies with national policy.

"The company's regional headquarters will be contacted and advised of the council's very serious concerns regarding this action."

Paul Ryder, who lives opposite the mast in Hawkswood Road , said: "O2 has no planning permission. We didn't want the mast in the first place and now they've put it in the wrong place.

"The council needs to take a hard line. I guarantee if I put up a tree house across the road, the council would be on me like a tonne of bricks.

"I want the work stopped and the mast moved to its right place."

Neighbour Dawn Harris said: "It's disgraceful. I've just had an extension built and if I have to abide by planning regulations, why shouldn't O2?

"None of us wanted the mast but all we want is for them to play by the rules."

Angela Johnson, O2's community relation's manager, stood firm.

She said: "The planning authority was happy for us to put in a retrospective planning application and the enforcement officer has not issued any stop notice.

"As far as we're concerned, we're perfectly at liberty to continue work on the mast."

Tamworth Herald

10:30 - 02 June 2005

So, mobile provider O2 are confident emissions tests on a mobile phone mast at St Edward's RC School in Packington Lane , Coleshill, are well within (ICNIRP) emission guidelines are they? (Herald, May 19).

Well of course they will be! These ridiculously lenient guidelines were adopted by Government in 1992, in the technology's infancy, after subjecting animals to 20 minutes of this electro-magnetic radiation and then pronouncing it safe to humans! In addition, this 'research' only measured the thermal effects of this radiation, not the biological effects.

Mast emissions will hardly ever be above these meaningless guidelines because, as independent research has shown, they were set 9,000 times too high, i.e. human cells start to be affected at 9,000 times below the current limit.

Phone mast emissions are pulsed and low level. The major concern is the biological effect on the body, the ability to alter human cells.

Brain wave patterns pulse on a similar frequency to radiation emitted by these masts. Independent research shows that it is this pulsing frequency of the radiation emitted that causes headaches, sleep disturbance, rashes and fatigue.

More worryingly it also reduces melatonin, the cancer fighting hormone, being released from the pineal gland.

Even the Government's own advisers (the Stewart Report) confirm that this technology has not been proved safe.

John Elliott, Bristol

--------

In addition, whenever O2 knows something is happening around a site, as we in Orpington have discovered, such as residents renting meters or the media coming, O2 switch the masts off!

The 'independent' report commissioned by O2 to test emissions in the immediate vicinity of the Orpington BT Exchange was a farce, as the sites chosen to take the readings from were laughable, eg, two roads away behind houses. All the hotspots we had repeatedly warned them out were totally ignored. We had to laugh, though, when Jim Stevenson, (O2 bod and also a Councillor for Mental Health in Lewisham - excuse the ironic laughing) insisted the masts were on, then was seen up on the roof of the exchange measuring the meters - either they were off, or he likes to live dangerously!

Angie Shields
http://www.OrpingtonRAM.co.uk

Malborough Herald

A PROPOSED mobile phone transmitter on the edge of Great Bedwyn would be too close to the school, protesters are telling Kennet district councillors.

Newbury-based Vodaphone Ltd is seeking planning consent for a telecommunications base station at Wansdyke Crossing in the parish of Little Bedwyn.

When the report by Kennet planning officers to members of its regulatory committee was prepared ahead of their meeting next Thursday, no reaction had been received from Little Bedwyn Parish Council.

However, neighbouring Great Bedwyn Parish Council has lodged an objection saying the transmitter with its 50ft mast would be too close to Great Bedwyn village school and contravene Government guidelines.

The school has lodged its own objection and nine other letters of protest have been received.

More than 70 per cent of parents and staff had objected when Vodaphone consulted the school.

Kennet officers are telling members that the Government recommendation is that the planning system is not the place for determining health safeguards and they have recommended approval of the plans.