News RSS Feed


Yate phone mast application approved


PLANS for a fourth phone mast on a Yate street which were thrown out by South Gloucestershire Council have been approved on appeal.

Paul Dignan, from the Planning Inspectorate, has given mobile phone firm Vodafone the go ahead to erect a 12-metre high mast on Shire Way.

Following a visit to the road, where there is already an O2 mast and two others are planned by company 3, Mr Dignan found that another mast would be in-keeping with the local area.

He said: "The mast would be located between, and in line with, 8-metre high lighting columns, and would be painted to match.

"The mast and associated equipment would be clearly visible from the public highway, but such utilitarian structures are commonplace along roadsides in urban areas and would blend fairly satisfactorily with the local environment."

Vodafone applied for planning permission for the mast to fill a gap in the firm’s third generation (3G) network.

The company said it had looked at alternative sites, including Shire Way Community Centre and at a railway access point in Littledean which were both suggested by the council, but found neither would provide adequate coverage.

People living in the area say they will be living in ‘phonemast’ alley if all four masts are built. Despite the planning inspector’s findings, campaigners have vowed to carry on fighting the mobile phone companies.

Dodington parish councillor Mandy Sainsbury, who lives in Blaisdon, said: "We don’t dispute the need for sites, however, they could be located at other sites. They don’t have to be concentrated in one place.

"We have suffered one ugly monstrosity on our doorsteps but to have two is an insult.

"It makes a mockery of the democratic process and you really have to question the impartiality of the Planning Inspectorate."

Added Mr Dignan: "Whilst I have taken full account of the fears expressed by the local residents, I conclude that public health considerations should not alter my earlier conclusion that the operational need for the proposal should prevail."

Residents have written to new Secretary of State for Communities John Denham calling for the appeal decision to be overturned.

Comments(2)

J Elliott says...
1:29pm Thu 25 Jun 09

Yes Mr Dignan, why should you care about local residents health. After all, you wont be living inn the vicinity of yet another mast bombarding the public with harmful electro magnetic radiation.

80% of WHO research proves that this technology is not safe. Over 2000 independent studies, linking phone mast electro magnetic radiation with serious ill health including cancer, confirm that phone masts should not be sited within 350 metres of schools or housing. Cancer clusters continue to increase in the vicinity of phone masts. Phone operators dismiss such research, alleging that their own studies suggest no health risk. However last year the national press revealed that a phone operator covered up the damaging results of their own research. The Ecolog Institute, a research organisation which examines the health effects of mobile phones, was commissioned to investigate the possible health risks of mobile phone masts. The 2003 Ecolog report confirmed:

'Given the results of the present epidemiological studies, it can be concluded that electromagnetic fields with frequencies in the mobile telecommunications range do play a role in the development of cancer. This is particularly notable for tumours of the central nervous system.'

Shame on the Planning Inspectorate and their government and phone operator paymasters for inflicting such a potentially life threatening toxic soup of electro smog on the general public.


Mandy Sainsbury says...
4:08pm Thu 25 Jun 09

Thank you J.Elliot for high lighting so well residents fears on the safety element of mobile phone masts.

South Glos Council & my colleagues on Dodington Parish Council compiled a very extensive objection document for Mr Dignan's consideration, suggesting other viable sites for the operator away from residential housing.

None of the points were addressed by the Inspector.

As private individual's myself and my neighbour's question the impartiality of this - we now as a result of this disgraceful biased decision have to live with a whole raft of concerns.

If the High Court was within our means we would have taken that route next.



Most popular






Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Local Businesses