GROUPS from different parts of Kerry will today lobby councillors in advance of a debate on a controversial rule about telecommunications masts in the county development plan.
The council bans the erection of masts within one kilometre of houses, schools and other residential buildings. The ruling is due to be reconsidered at the meeting of Kerry County Council.
Some community bodies are strongly opposed to a move by county manager Tom Curran and other senior executives to have the rule removed.
Council officials claim the restriction was affecting the roll-out of broadband throughout the county and the provision of modern communications for the emergency services.
And despite the council continuing to refuse planning for masts because of the bylaw, An Bord Pleanála regularly overturns council decisions and grants planning permission for masts.
So far, councillors have supported the retention of the rule and are coming under increasing pressure from groups of objectors to maintain that line.
A spokesperson for the groups said they would be seeking the continuing support of elected councillors and were getting a petition signed by people throughout Kerry.
The Glenbeigh area is a hotbed of protests against masts with objections, to about five mast proposals. Their anger was highlighted by the public burning of a mock mast by local people.
One of the leading Glenbeigh objectors, Clara Leahy, said locals are concerned at the effects of exposure to electromagnetic radiation from communications masts and felt their concerns are being ignored.
The council again applied the one kilometre rule to refuse the application to the latest application. An appeal has been lodged with An Bord Pleanála.
But council management wants the rule removed from the county development plan which has been in place since 2003.
"This provision is a very crude instrument as it takes any deciding role from the planners on any application for a mast once it is clear that the restriction applies to such an application," said a report from the executive.
Since 2003, the council has received 75 applications for masts. Of these, 38 have been refused planning permission and 25 of the refusals have subsequently been overturned by An Bord Pleanála.
Meanwhile, the Tetra communications company is seeking an alternative site for a 15-metre mast in Annascaul.
Following a campaign by residents of the village, work was halted on a site that had been chosen for the mast. The company is now seeking an alternative site, a distance from the village. An Bord Pleanála, however, granted planning for the mast after an appeal against a refusal by the council.
Irish Examiner
www.buckplanning.ie
Showing posts with label masts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label masts. Show all posts
Monday, 16 November 2009
Monday, 12 January 2009
Residents win battle over mobile phone antennae
RESIDENTS OF a small Waterford fishing village have won a three-year battle to have a mobile phone antennae taken down from the roof of their local shop.
An Bord Pleanála, in two separate decisions, has ruled in favour of residents of Dunmore East who are now celebrating their victory over three communications companies – Hutchinson 3G, Meteor and 02.
The 12 antennae and dishes on the roof of the village’s Londis store were erected initially without planning permission and residents claimed they only became aware of them when their television sets starting picking up interference.
But following a ruling by An Bord Pleanála, the locals now plan to demand that the equipment – over which they had expressed health concerns – be taken down.
“This is a significant result for the group of determined residents who came together and battled against something they felt was just not right,” said solicitor John Reedy.
Residents complained that the equipment was located only yards from homes, shops and also a playschool attended by 30 children. Residents had said that while there was no proof of risks, there was no proof to the contrary either.
Meteor and 02 had lodged a joint application for planning retention for their equipment while Hutchinson 3G had applied alone. At the height of the dispute, Meteor and 02 had claimed that their antennae could help in future sea rescues in the fishing village.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
An Bord Pleanála, in two separate decisions, has ruled in favour of residents of Dunmore East who are now celebrating their victory over three communications companies – Hutchinson 3G, Meteor and 02.
The 12 antennae and dishes on the roof of the village’s Londis store were erected initially without planning permission and residents claimed they only became aware of them when their television sets starting picking up interference.
But following a ruling by An Bord Pleanála, the locals now plan to demand that the equipment – over which they had expressed health concerns – be taken down.
“This is a significant result for the group of determined residents who came together and battled against something they felt was just not right,” said solicitor John Reedy.
Residents complained that the equipment was located only yards from homes, shops and also a playschool attended by 30 children. Residents had said that while there was no proof of risks, there was no proof to the contrary either.
Meteor and 02 had lodged a joint application for planning retention for their equipment while Hutchinson 3G had applied alone. At the height of the dispute, Meteor and 02 had claimed that their antennae could help in future sea rescues in the fishing village.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Sunday, 19 August 2007
Man promises Coillte not to trespass on mast site
A LANDOWNER has been freed from jail after promising not to trespass on or interfere with one of the most strategic communications sites in south-west Ireland.
Walter Evans, aged 52, of Carrigfadda, Skibbereen, Co Cork, is in a protracted dispute with the State forestry company, Coillte Teoranta, over ownership of land at the summit of Nowen Hill in west Cork.
On Monday, Judge Sean Ó Donnabháin sent him to Cork Prison for refusing to accept a Circuit Court order demanding he would not enter Coillte lands, interfere with locks and publicly dispute the title of the lands on the internet.
On Wednesday, Evans appeared before the court again and agreed to abide by the conditions imposed on him sought by Coillte.
Nowen Hill, at 1,763ft, is a strategic vantage point hosting communications masts for the region’s mobile phone, broadband and radio signals. Each of the sites generates revenue of about €30,000 a year.
Evans’s counsel Greg Casey said although Evans accepted the conditions he plans to take a separate case to decide the ownership of the land.
Judge Ó Donnabháin said Evans was within his rights to bring the boundary dispute to court but he could not trespass on the land until a ruling was made.
“Nobody is going to stop him [Evans] appealing the land ownership. But what we are here about is that Evans is taking the law into his own hands by cutting locks and breaking barriers,” said the judge.
Evans has leased the land from Coillte since 1988 and developed several transmitter sites which were rented out to communications companies.
In recent years he purchased the patch adjoining Coillte’s property from a relative so the masts could be transferred to his own land.
The border between this land and the Coillte property is in dispute.
Maps given to Evans in 1990 showed a boundary of the Coillte property to be different to a recent version drawn up by GPS satellite technology.
However, the judge did not allow arguments on the ownership of the land to be heard and said this had to be taken as separate legal proceedings.
Counsel for Coillte, Marjorie Farrelly, said the only issue before the court was that of contempt: “The matter that comes before the court refers not the issue of the boundary but to the breaking of barriers and the cutting of locks.”
However, Mr Casey said Evans still needed access to the land.
“In relation to the Coillte mast site there has been a significant problem with one of the masts belonging to Evans which was required to be taken down under one of the conditions of the planning permission for another mast,” he said.
The same road accesses both Coillte land and Evans’s land. However, because he is prevented from trespassing on Coillte property he cannot reach his tract or the mast he owns on the forestry company’s property. The latest proceedings were set off after a photograph at the site with Kathy Sinnott MEP appeared on the Indymedia website.
The article posted by Evans disputed the ownership of the land.
Coillte has collected comprehensive surveillance records of Evans’s movements on the site and Ms Farrelly said the cost of this had run into “hundreds of thousands of euro”.
Conor Ryan
Irish Examiner
Walter Evans, aged 52, of Carrigfadda, Skibbereen, Co Cork, is in a protracted dispute with the State forestry company, Coillte Teoranta, over ownership of land at the summit of Nowen Hill in west Cork.
On Monday, Judge Sean Ó Donnabháin sent him to Cork Prison for refusing to accept a Circuit Court order demanding he would not enter Coillte lands, interfere with locks and publicly dispute the title of the lands on the internet.
On Wednesday, Evans appeared before the court again and agreed to abide by the conditions imposed on him sought by Coillte.
Nowen Hill, at 1,763ft, is a strategic vantage point hosting communications masts for the region’s mobile phone, broadband and radio signals. Each of the sites generates revenue of about €30,000 a year.
Evans’s counsel Greg Casey said although Evans accepted the conditions he plans to take a separate case to decide the ownership of the land.
Judge Ó Donnabháin said Evans was within his rights to bring the boundary dispute to court but he could not trespass on the land until a ruling was made.
“Nobody is going to stop him [Evans] appealing the land ownership. But what we are here about is that Evans is taking the law into his own hands by cutting locks and breaking barriers,” said the judge.
Evans has leased the land from Coillte since 1988 and developed several transmitter sites which were rented out to communications companies.
In recent years he purchased the patch adjoining Coillte’s property from a relative so the masts could be transferred to his own land.
The border between this land and the Coillte property is in dispute.
Maps given to Evans in 1990 showed a boundary of the Coillte property to be different to a recent version drawn up by GPS satellite technology.
However, the judge did not allow arguments on the ownership of the land to be heard and said this had to be taken as separate legal proceedings.
Counsel for Coillte, Marjorie Farrelly, said the only issue before the court was that of contempt: “The matter that comes before the court refers not the issue of the boundary but to the breaking of barriers and the cutting of locks.”
However, Mr Casey said Evans still needed access to the land.
“In relation to the Coillte mast site there has been a significant problem with one of the masts belonging to Evans which was required to be taken down under one of the conditions of the planning permission for another mast,” he said.
The same road accesses both Coillte land and Evans’s land. However, because he is prevented from trespassing on Coillte property he cannot reach his tract or the mast he owns on the forestry company’s property. The latest proceedings were set off after a photograph at the site with Kathy Sinnott MEP appeared on the Indymedia website.
The article posted by Evans disputed the ownership of the land.
Coillte has collected comprehensive surveillance records of Evans’s movements on the site and Ms Farrelly said the cost of this had run into “hundreds of thousands of euro”.
Conor Ryan
Irish Examiner
Tuesday, 6 February 2007
Phone masts radiation 'safe'
Bad news for protestors ...
Paul Cullen in the Irish Times tells us that radiation emitted by mobile phone masts in the Republic is significantly lower than internationally-permitted limits, according to research carried out for the Commission for Communications Regulation (ComReg).
Some 80 antenna masts around the State were tested for their emissions of non-ionising radiation and all were found to be within safe limits. In some cases the levels were less than one-thousandth of the limits set by the International Commission on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). The tests, carried out between November 2005 and November 2006, confirm earlier research carried out for ComReg by consultants who measured radiation at over 400 sites.
The latest research was carried out by Vilicom, an Irish telecommunications company that does extensive work for mobile phone companies.
The highest level of radiation was found in Smithfield, Dublin, where readings of 4.47 Volts/ metre were recorded at two mobile frequencies, compared to the ICNIRP guideline limit of 59.36 V/m.
The next highest reading was taken at the Old Tramore Road, Waterford city (3.06 V/m on one frequency compared to a guideline limit of 58.98 V/m). Other higher than average readings were recorded at Castletroy, Co Limerick (2.8 V/m); Piltown, Co Kilkenny (2.8 V/m), Abbeyleix, Co Laois (2.6 V/m); Beggars Bush, Dublin (2.6 V/m) and Kimmage (2.6 V/m on two frequencies)
Currently, there are over 6,000 masts in the State and this number is set to increase. The Irish Electromagnetic Radiation Victims Network said that international limits on radiation needed to be revised downwards.
Paul Cullen in the Irish Times tells us that radiation emitted by mobile phone masts in the Republic is significantly lower than internationally-permitted limits, according to research carried out for the Commission for Communications Regulation (ComReg).
Some 80 antenna masts around the State were tested for their emissions of non-ionising radiation and all were found to be within safe limits. In some cases the levels were less than one-thousandth of the limits set by the International Commission on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). The tests, carried out between November 2005 and November 2006, confirm earlier research carried out for ComReg by consultants who measured radiation at over 400 sites.
The latest research was carried out by Vilicom, an Irish telecommunications company that does extensive work for mobile phone companies.
The highest level of radiation was found in Smithfield, Dublin, where readings of 4.47 Volts/ metre were recorded at two mobile frequencies, compared to the ICNIRP guideline limit of 59.36 V/m.
The next highest reading was taken at the Old Tramore Road, Waterford city (3.06 V/m on one frequency compared to a guideline limit of 58.98 V/m). Other higher than average readings were recorded at Castletroy, Co Limerick (2.8 V/m); Piltown, Co Kilkenny (2.8 V/m), Abbeyleix, Co Laois (2.6 V/m); Beggars Bush, Dublin (2.6 V/m) and Kimmage (2.6 V/m on two frequencies)
Currently, there are over 6,000 masts in the State and this number is set to increase. The Irish Electromagnetic Radiation Victims Network said that international limits on radiation needed to be revised downwards.
Tuesday, 30 January 2007
Kicked into touch
Interesting case from The Dublin People:
ONE of the Northside’s best-known GAA clubs is on a collision course with its local council and residents over a new floodlighting pylon it has erected at its grounds. St Vincent’s GAA Club in Marino replaced an existing floodlighting pylon in December, with a new larger structure to help accommodate a mobile phone mast and three-metre control box.
Local residents have reacted angrily to the erection of the mast, which they claim is in breach of safety guidelines that recommend phone masts should not be placed beside schools or houses.
And Dublin City Council has already ordered St Vincent’s to remove the new pylon, because it is in breach of strict planning regulations.
St Vincent’s had a planning exemption based on erecting phone antennae on the original pylon, but not for the erection of a new bulkier structure.
The club has been given a month to comply with the request from Dublin City Council, after a letter was sent to it from the local authority’s planning enforcement officer.
However, a spokeswoman for St Vincent’s told Northside People that the club was unaware it had violated any planning rules.
Similarly, a spokeswoman for Vodafone, the mobile phone company responsible for the erection of the phone antennae on the pylon, stated that no planning regulations had been broken.
She said Vodafone was very confident of proving this to Dublin City Council and that the new pylon with mast would be retained at the grounds.
Should St Vincent’s and Vodafone’s claims prove successful, it is sure to bring an angry response from residents living beside the club.
Speaking to Northside People, Conor Horgan, from Charlemont, Griffith Avenue, Marino, said the local residents were forming a group to appeal against ‘retention’ permission for the mast, if this is applied for.
Mr Horgan said he was horrified when he noticed the new pylon with the mast going up, without any prior knowledge or consent from local residents.
“The first we knew about this was when we seen the construction equipment arriving,” Mr Horgan stated.
“This new pylon with mast was subsequently erected in a matter of days and is now domineering over our homes.
“From discussions with my neighbours, we are in shock that this could have taken place.”
Mr Horgan said the residents are extremely worried about the possible health implications of having a mast so close to their homes.
The mast is less than 20 metres from the closest houses in Charlemont estate.
Mr Horgan added that following local discussions between neighbours, it was agreed that if St Vincent’s move the mast to their second pitch, which is away from houses, local residents would not object.
Cllr Gerry Breen (FG) supports the residents and brought the issue up with Dublin City Council.
Cllr Breen said the club had no right to go ahead with the new pylon, without first contacting local residents and obtaining the proper planning permission.
The spokeswoman for St Vincent’s said, however, that the club would not have gone ahead with the pylon and mast if the health of local residents was at risk in any way.
“The club did extensive research into the possible risks, including gaining information from Government agencies and relevant health authourities,” she stated.
“We are very confident that this new mast will not pose any health risks to the residents.
“Besides that, we have a very large local juvenile base at the club and if we felt this was posing a risk to them in any way, we would not have gone ahead with it.
“Anyone with concerns can check out the relevant links on our website, paying specific attention in regard to any of the health issues with masts,” she added.
Meanwhile, a spokeswoman for Vodafone said there has been a misconception about what exactly is, and is not, exempt from planning permission under Department of Environment guidelines.
“The guidelines specifically state that a new structure cannot be taller than the original,” she explained.
“The new pylon erected at St Vincent’s is wider than the original but it is not taller and is therefore not in breach of the regulations.
“We are happy to revert back to Dublin City Council in relation to this and are very confident that the new pylon with mast will be retained,” the spokeswoman added.
A spokeswoman for Dublin City Council said the council’s Planning Enforcement Officer inspected the new floodlighting pylon and issued a warning letter to St Vincent’s.
“One of the requirements in this letter requires the removal of the unauthorised floodlighting pole together with all fixtures and fittings, including the antennae,” she said.
ONE of the Northside’s best-known GAA clubs is on a collision course with its local council and residents over a new floodlighting pylon it has erected at its grounds. St Vincent’s GAA Club in Marino replaced an existing floodlighting pylon in December, with a new larger structure to help accommodate a mobile phone mast and three-metre control box.
Local residents have reacted angrily to the erection of the mast, which they claim is in breach of safety guidelines that recommend phone masts should not be placed beside schools or houses.
And Dublin City Council has already ordered St Vincent’s to remove the new pylon, because it is in breach of strict planning regulations.
St Vincent’s had a planning exemption based on erecting phone antennae on the original pylon, but not for the erection of a new bulkier structure.
The club has been given a month to comply with the request from Dublin City Council, after a letter was sent to it from the local authority’s planning enforcement officer.
However, a spokeswoman for St Vincent’s told Northside People that the club was unaware it had violated any planning rules.
Similarly, a spokeswoman for Vodafone, the mobile phone company responsible for the erection of the phone antennae on the pylon, stated that no planning regulations had been broken.
She said Vodafone was very confident of proving this to Dublin City Council and that the new pylon with mast would be retained at the grounds.
Should St Vincent’s and Vodafone’s claims prove successful, it is sure to bring an angry response from residents living beside the club.
Speaking to Northside People, Conor Horgan, from Charlemont, Griffith Avenue, Marino, said the local residents were forming a group to appeal against ‘retention’ permission for the mast, if this is applied for.
Mr Horgan said he was horrified when he noticed the new pylon with the mast going up, without any prior knowledge or consent from local residents.
“The first we knew about this was when we seen the construction equipment arriving,” Mr Horgan stated.
“This new pylon with mast was subsequently erected in a matter of days and is now domineering over our homes.
“From discussions with my neighbours, we are in shock that this could have taken place.”
Mr Horgan said the residents are extremely worried about the possible health implications of having a mast so close to their homes.
The mast is less than 20 metres from the closest houses in Charlemont estate.
Mr Horgan added that following local discussions between neighbours, it was agreed that if St Vincent’s move the mast to their second pitch, which is away from houses, local residents would not object.
Cllr Gerry Breen (FG) supports the residents and brought the issue up with Dublin City Council.
Cllr Breen said the club had no right to go ahead with the new pylon, without first contacting local residents and obtaining the proper planning permission.
The spokeswoman for St Vincent’s said, however, that the club would not have gone ahead with the pylon and mast if the health of local residents was at risk in any way.
“The club did extensive research into the possible risks, including gaining information from Government agencies and relevant health authourities,” she stated.
“We are very confident that this new mast will not pose any health risks to the residents.
“Besides that, we have a very large local juvenile base at the club and if we felt this was posing a risk to them in any way, we would not have gone ahead with it.
“Anyone with concerns can check out the relevant links on our website, paying specific attention in regard to any of the health issues with masts,” she added.
Meanwhile, a spokeswoman for Vodafone said there has been a misconception about what exactly is, and is not, exempt from planning permission under Department of Environment guidelines.
“The guidelines specifically state that a new structure cannot be taller than the original,” she explained.
“The new pylon erected at St Vincent’s is wider than the original but it is not taller and is therefore not in breach of the regulations.
“We are happy to revert back to Dublin City Council in relation to this and are very confident that the new pylon with mast will be retained,” the spokeswoman added.
A spokeswoman for Dublin City Council said the council’s Planning Enforcement Officer inspected the new floodlighting pylon and issued a warning letter to St Vincent’s.
“One of the requirements in this letter requires the removal of the unauthorised floodlighting pole together with all fixtures and fittings, including the antennae,” she said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)