Birmingham's 1600 phone masts!
Birmingham Friends of the Earth started to campaign on telecommunications masts
sometime last year. So what has happened since then? Birmingham City Council
has considered phone masts in its draft UDP (Unitary Development Plan) and produced
its own draft guidance for the installation of mobile phone telecommunications' equipment;
and the government has published its amendments to PPG8 - the planning guidance
that deals with telecommunications.
In its draft guidance the Council estimates a staggering 1600 new phone masts
and base station for Birmingham (section 5.3). So far this estimate cannot be
verified, as the Council has failed to produce or at least make available to
the public, a map showing all the mast installations in B'ham.
The government also strongly encourages telecommunications operators and local
planning authorities to carry out annual discussions about rollout plans for
each area (PPG8, section 8). There is no evidence that these talks have been
taking place in Birmingham and if they did, the outcomes were not shared with
the public.
Due to the sheer number of planning applications in Birmingham for telecommunications' installations
we decided to draw up a standard letter to make the Council aware of our objections
to the distribution of phone masts and base stations around the city. Every week
there are between 3-10 applications made by various mobile phone companies! I
have lost count of the actual number of responses we did, but I can tell you
the outcomes so far:
According to our records, 30 applications have been refused, most of them on
account of adverse effects on the visual amenity of the area in question; may
they be in residential areas, on school or hospital grounds, on listed buildings,
sites in the green belt or conservation areas. In these cases Birmingham City
Council has acted according to their own draft guidance that disallows telecommunications
equipment in these so-called 'sensitive areas'.
In one instance an application was refused because the cabin and mast were likely
to be detrimental to several trees which were protected by a Tree Preservation
Order. In the most high profile case the erection of a 10m high mast in Sutton
Park was refused, precisely because it would have been in a registered park.
Well done to Friends of Sutton Park and their rallying of local residents who
won that battle.
On the downside Birmingham City Council approved 21 applications, some of which
were deemed not even to have needed prior approval by the council. I am concerned
that PPG 8 retains the prior approval system for masts of 15 metres and under
and only extends the time for local authorities to deal with applications to
56 days. In other words, masts below 15 metres do not, unlike virtually any other
development, require planning permission. Instead, they are "permitted developments" i.e.
the local authority only needs to be notified and then the mast can go up.
You may want to lobby your MP and the Government to find out why the recommendation
of the Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones (Stewart) Report section 1.36
has not been implemented: "We recommend that for all base stations, including
those with masts under 15m, permitted development rights for their erection be
revoked and that the siting of all new base stations should be subject to the
formal planning process."
I am also worried, like Debra Shipley MP for Stourbridge, who tabled a Ten Minute
Bill in parliament, to control the siting of masts, that this special provision
to mobile network operators will mean that legitimate objections by people who
live and work near masts will not be properly heard.
However, at last the government has acknowledged that there are health concerns
over telecommunications' installations, but still do not give local authorities
the means to act on them.
Health considerations and public concern can in principle be material considerations
in determining applications for planning permission and prior approval. However,
it is the Government's firm view that the planning system is not the place for
determining health safeguards. It remains central Government's responsibility
to decide what measures are necessary to protect public health. (PPG 8 sections
29 and 30).
Well, I guess we shall be reminding the Government of its duty when it all goes
pear-shaped as with BSE and Foot and Mouth!
So, in terms of advice to anybody fighting mast applications I would recommend
to seek rejection on the grounds of siting and appearance. Factors concerning
siting may involve:
* height of the site in relation to surrounding land;
* existence of topographical features and natural vegetation;
* effect on the skyline or horizon;
* the site when observed from any side, including from outside the authority's
own area;
* the site in relation to areas designated locally for their scenic or conservation
value;
* the site in relation to existing masts, structures or buildings, including
buildings of a historical or traditional character; and
* the site in relation to residential property
Excellent advice on how to fight masts can be found on the Dunton No-masts Campaign
website where I have found the following action guide:
Action Check List:
* Identify timescale for objections
* Check that your neighbours are aware
* Check validity of the planning notice
* Write letter of objection to council and copy to your local councillor and
the landowner
* Write to your MP about the application and implementation of the Stewart Report
* Contact the local press
* Organise a petition
* Find out who in the council will be making a decision on the application and
brief them
* Find out the position of your Council
* If the decision is to be made at a council or committee meeting, attend and
speak if possible.
If anyone needs help with fighting an application for masts, do not hesitate
to contact me at B'ham FOE. Good luck with your campaigning.
Kirsten Söntgens
References:
Birmingham City Council Draft Supplementary Planning Guidance for the Installation
of Mobile Phone Telecommunications Equipment, 2 Nov 2000
Debra Shipley MP: Bill to control the siting and development of telecommunications
masts, House of Commons, 28 Feb 2001
DTLR Planning Policy Guidance Note 8: Telecommunications, 22 Aug 2001
Websites:
Dunton No-masts Campaign website http://www.ism-ltd.freeserve.co.uk/dnmc/
IEGMP Independent Expert group on Mobile Phones, for an excellent summary of
the Stewart Report: http://www.iegmp.org.uk/IEGMP.htm
Teeside Green Party 'Responding to plans for mobile phone masts up to 15m high' http://www.gn.apc.org/negreens/teemast1.htm
Mast Action UK: http://freespace.virginnet.co.uk/mast.action/
I f you need to find out where a base station is, this site finder will give
details on all base station in the UK http://www.sitefinder.radio.gov.uk/
Mast Proposed for Wildlife...?
On 6th October, Birmingham FOE was invited for the first time to a planning team
visit to the proposed site of a mast on the edge of Plants Brook Nature Reserve.
When I arrived at the reserve and introduced myself as FOE, the representatives
of the company proposing the mast were none too happy, labouring as they did
under the assumption that FOE "objects to everything".
When the councillors arrived we were taken to see the site, which at this point
didn't look too bad. The company reps had huge smiles on their faces. But that
was before the head of the planning committee suggested we look at it from the
other side of the proposed site. The huge smiles suddenly went as it became apparent
that the 66ft phone mast would be only 200 yards from houses on Hanson Bridge
Road.
Waiting for the planning committee were several residents who handed to the councillors
a 500-name petition objecting to the proposed mast. Citing health implications
and negative visual impact of the mast, the residents made it clear to all present
that they did not want this monstrosity on their doorstep. Support from FOE for
their arguments was gratefully received. However, following a meeting of the
planning committee on 11th October, we are still waiting for a decision.
Art Jacob