Latest Headlines RSS Feed


Blunder paves way for 02 phone mast

8:59am Sunday 24th February 2008

comment Comments (4)   Have your say »


Furious residents are locked in a stand-off with O2 after an administrative blunder caused Hounslow's planners to miss the deadline to turn down an application to install a phone mast.

The base of the O2 mast has already been put in and this week several Sutton Court Road residents took days off of work to prevent the mobile phone company's workmen from continuing the installation.

Proposals to erect the mast on a small strip of land in the Grove Park area of Chiswick were rejected twice by Hounslow's planning department.

However, due to an administrative error, the latest decision to reject the mast was submitted 24 hours too late.

Resident Dawn Wilson said the mast site is 200 yards from a primary school. She said: "O2 is just ignoring local opinion. They are saying they have permission, but it is only on a technicality that it is legal because basically Hounslow Council screwed up by not getting the paperwork in on time.

"If they put it up it will be very difficult and expensive to take down."

Another resident, Steve Nutt, said O2 was being "sneaky" about the installation after workmen started digging a trench for the mast at 5.30am.

"The workmen keep coming back out to do a little bit more. It is 17 metres away from peoples' flats - it's atrocious," he said.

In October residents submitted 120 letters of objection to Hounslow's planning department.

A Hounslow Council spokesman said: "We have corrected the system to ensure that this error cannot occur again and are in discussion with O2 regarding the installation of the phone mast."

O2's project manager at the site said they would consider the situation for a few more weeks and will look at the possibility of moving the mast to a more appropriate location.


Your Say YourRichmond and Twickenham Times

Yasmin Skelt, Chorleywood, Herts says...
11:29am Sun 24 Feb 08

Not the old "56 Day Loophole" again after all these years O2 could get the council into serious legal costs over this one. O2 should not continue to put in the mast because it will have to come out if the residents use a "Schedule 2". I shall e-mail the Guardian separately with details of "Schedule 2" and latest on ill health clusters near masts. If house builders are not allowed to start work at 5:30am, why does the council allow O2 to cause a disturbance at that time to install a mast?

Jock, London says...
1:17am Mon 25 Feb 08

Yasmin Skelt wrote:
Not the old "56 Day Loophole" again after all these years O2 could get the council into serious legal costs over this one. O2 should not continue to put in the mast because it will have to come out if the residents use a "Schedule 2". I shall e-mail the Guardian separately with details of "Schedule 2" and latest on ill health clusters near masts. If house builders are not allowed to start work at 5:30am, why does the council allow O2 to cause a disturbance at that time to install a mast?
I'm sure the journalists at the Guardian have better things to waste time on than Schedule2 and the hearsay evidence of ill health clusters.

Ill health clusters can be caused by a number of things. Lack of exercise, and poor diet being two. And just by coincidence, the people more likely to suffer from these two are the ones living in a heavily populated area, such as a tower block - quite a number of which just happen to have a phone mast close to, or on top of them!!

And before you say it - No, 9/11 wasn't an inside job.

me, home says...
7:11am Mon 25 Feb 08

Yasmin Skelt wrote:
Not the old "56 Day Loophole" again after all these years O2 could get the council into serious legal costs over this one. O2 should not continue to put in the mast because it will have to come out if the residents use a "Schedule 2". I shall e-mail the Guardian separately with details of "Schedule 2" and latest on ill health clusters near masts. If house builders are not allowed to start work at 5:30am, why does the council allow O2 to cause a disturbance at that time to install a mast?
it is not a 'loophole', it is the law. for information, mobile operators do not benefit from the prior approval procedure all of the time, in fact more often than not applications are refused as the council has not had time to fully assess the application within 56 days and rather than not issue a decision (leading to a 'deemed consent' that will be attacked by the local people/ press) they will issue a refusal that is often overturned at appeal. objectors should advise their friends/ family and neighbours to stop using their mobile phones, then the operators would have no need to spend thousands of pounds installing masts in areas where there is no demand for coverage

Yasmin Skelt, Chorleywood, Hertfordshire says...
7:59am Mon 25 Feb 08

Dear Jack,
1.17am - you either work for the mobile phone companies or you need to get out more!!

Comments are closed on this article.

Not welcome: Protesters spell out their message to 02                                   Not welcome: Protesters spell out their message to 02

Sponsored Links


Local Links


Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »