Dozens object to 49ft Telford mast application


Dozens of objections have been lodged by residents in Telford over controversial proposals for a 49ft telecommunications mast near their homes. The plan has been put forward by Vodafone (UK) and Telefonica O2 (UK). Dozens of objections have been lodged by residents in Telford over controversial proposals for a 49ft telecommunications mast near their homes. The plan has been put forward by Vodafone (UK) and Telefonica O2 (UK). The companies want to put up the pole with antennae and equipment cabinet in Priorslee Avenue in Priorslee. But residents say it would be an eyesore and have concerns about health implications for children. Telford & Wrekin Council's plans board is being recommended to approve the application.
Dozens of objections have been lodged by residents in Telford over controversial proposals for a 49ft telecommunications mast near their homes. The plan has been put forward by Vodafone (UK) and Telefonica O2 (UK).
The companies want to put up the pole with antennae and equipment cabinet in Priorslee Avenue in Priorslee.
But residents say it would be an eyesore and have concerns about health implications for children.
Telford & Wrekin Council's plans board is being recommended to approve the application.
A report to the meeting on January 5 says: "The proposed 14.8m high slim line telecommunications monopole does not require a full planning application and therefore prior approval is given for the siting and appearance of the telecommunications installation and its permitted development rights are hereby confirmed."
Ward member Councillor Ian Fletcher has also objected to the plan, saying the pole would be in an area where children play and young people congregate.
Councillor Fletcher is also concerned the pole would be situated where two traffic accidents have occurred and is worried it could increase the risk of injuries.
When the report to the plans board was drawn up 74 letters and e-mails had been received objecting to the proposal, claiming the mast would be too close to homes, is a poor choice of location, would be an eyesore, would jeopardise highway safety and could impact on health.