Planners ignore mast objections

Sep 19 2008 by Les Stewart, Perthshire Advertiser Friday

COUNCIL planners are urging approval of controversial plans for a 40-foot high mobile phone mast near a Perth hospital, despite an avalanches of objections from locals.

The planning bid, by Vodafone Ltd., relates to an area of predominantly open space in Muirhall Road, south west of Murray Royal Hospital.

The company want the go-ahead to construct a telecommunications base station and ground-based equipment cabinets. The total height of the mast would be 46-and-a-half feet.

The application was to have been considered by the council’s development control committee last month.

But it was withdrawn at the last minute after it was discovered that it hadn’t been included on the weekly planning list.

It will now go before councillors next Wednesday. They will be told that 99 letters of objection have been received.

Most relate to health and safety concerns associated with possible mast emissions but others claim:

In an unsuitable location, adjacent to the Millennium Park in Muirhall Road.

It is adjacent to the Kinnoull, Bridgend and Gannochy Conservation Area and, therefore, is contrary to its character.

It overlooks neighbouring residential properties.

It will create an eyesore for the area.

There are also objections because of the mast’s height and claims it will create visual and environmental problems. Nick Brian, the council’s development quality manager, points out that the nearest residential property is a “sufficient distance away” and there are, therefore, “no significant residential amenity issues.”

Although the mast is described as “simplistic and functional in appearance,” it will be coloured grey – the same as existing street lighting columns.

The ground-based equipment will also be coloured green to integrate with the surrounding area.

The applicants had also provided certification that the planning bid met current safety guidelines.

Mr Brian adds in his report: “The majority of representations received have cited health and safety concerns as the major issue.

“However, this ground of objection is put forward without any significant form of evidence.

“Furthermore, health and safety doesn't not qualify as a material consideration.”

Subject to a number of conditions, he is recommending approval of the application.