Phone mast gaffe angers parents
Published at 09:38, Friday, 19 June 2009
COUNTY planners have been left with egg on their faces after a blunder allowed the erection of a mobile phone mast right outside a school.
They dragged their feet for so long over a proposal to erect the mast outside Darras Hall First School that their decision to say “no” came too late.
And now angry parents and school governors are demanding an explanation as to what went wrong.
Parents have also raised a petition to persuade applicants Telefonica to seek a less contentious site for the mast.
A county council spokesman said: “There has been an oversight in interpretation of regulations in respect of this application.
“We have apologised publicly for this and officers are actively working to try to resolve the situation, including meeting with the phone mast company to see if a more suitable alternative site can be agreed.
“The company has agreed to meet and this will take place shortly.
“As the application was for a mast less than 15m high it did not need planning permission as such.
“However, under the regulations, the council can refuse or grant consent to its siting and design as long as the decision was made within 56 days of being notified of the proposal.
“Unfortunately the 56 days ran out just before the (west area county planning committee) meeting on May 14 – a point that was overlooked when the application was considered initially at the committee.”
The chairman of the school governors, Nigel Twelves, said the governing body, teachers and parents alike were extremely concerned about the plans to site a 3G mobile phone mast for O2 within a few feet of the main pedestrian entrance to the school on Broadway.
He said: “The application was made earlier this year and notices were posted on local telegraph poles as usual.
“Numerous objections came from the governors, local parents, local residents and the town council which lodged formal objections.”
At a meeting of the west area county planning committee, in Hexham, on May 14, the application was unanimously rejected, and parents breathed a sigh of relief.
Then came the bombshell that the refusal was invalid, because of a gaffe in the planning department.
The company was not notified of the rejection until two days after the statutory 56 day period – which meant the application was accepted by default.
Dr Twelves said: “As no objections were received from the highways authority, the company will be permitted to use the grass verge directly outside the entrance to the school as planned
“This information only came to light by chance when a parent was attending another planning meeting.
“The council had not seen fit to contact the school directly despite the serious impact it was going to have upon us.”
The erection of the mast cannot now be blocked and all the council can do is to try to mitigate the situation by persuading the company to consider an alternate site on Broadway – even though the school follows the road in close proximity for most of its length.
Dr Twelves said: “The final sting in the tail is that the application never needed to go to council in the first place.
“It could have been delegated to an officer for a decision, which would have avoided all of this trouble.”
Members of the west area committee were informed of the bungle at their meeting in Hexham on Thursday, when principal planning officer Jack Chown explained what had gone wrong.
He said: “We are in negotiations with the company and fingers crossed, we will be able to negotiate a better site.”
Committee member Coun. Edward Heslop, of Colwell, added: “This is very regrettable,.
“But I hope someone at the company has a conscience, and accepts the reasons we refused this.”
Published by http://www.hexhamcourant.co.uk
