Forum Topic

NEW ERECTION!

Anyone know what the newly erected tall post opposite 228,Twickenham Rd outside Redlees Park is?It looks like some sort of phone/radio mast & must have been put up over the last few days as I'm sure it wasn't there last Friday.

Kevin Farnan ● 6972d17 Comments

>>Matt - just for information the decision to refuse permission was taken by officers under delegated powers.  The application didn't come to Area Committee<

Matt Harmer ● 6967d

I can understand why a politician would wish to cherry pick "fights" which are winnable and adopt a low profile on those which are probably destined to fail, but as a local community group we have a duty to speak up for residents irrespective of the chances of victory.  It would have been quite unscrupulous for us to have done anything else - that just isn't the way we think.Matt - just for information the decision to refuse permission was taken by officers under delegated powers.  The application didn't come to Area Committee.

Phil Andrews ● 6967d

Yes - it is - but the thing is Matt local authorties belong to bigger organisations who do have more clout, it really needs one to start and get other councils involved and then feed up the chain, that is how legislation will get changed. Having all the local protests in the world will not achieve diddly squat, good spin though. Planning is very much a case of one man's meat - I have been watching the BBC's favourite pieces of architecture this week on the London news and I thought some of it was dreadful as I don't like modern stuff, but the this was done by public vote - so it sort of proves my point, it's all down to individual taste at times. With 'phone masts I think the health issues remain unanswered, so I would err on the side of caution, but big business means big bucks so who will listen?

Vanessa Smith ● 6968d

Was it a fight worth taking on. As Venessa says the planning laws are skewed in favour of these towers.Its the same here in OZ. They can be put up vitually anywhere as long as it not within x feet of houses or schools.

Neil Chippendale ● 6969d

Sarah,It was not a strange comment - I was merely pointing out that sometimes people behave like Don Quixote - tilting at windmills, the legislation works in favour of these masts - so it is a fight you are extremely unlikely to win, it would be better to accept that and save your energy and work towards changing the legislation, still it looks good I suppose when you wind local people up, but I feel it is misleading if you know it's a waste of time.

Vanessa Smith ● 6971d

Sarah,It was not a strange comment - I was merely pointing out that sometimes people behave like Don Quixote - tilting at windmills, the legislation works in favour of these masts - so it is a fight you are extremely unlikely to win, it would be better to accept that and save your energy and work towards changing the legislation, still it looks good I suppose when you wind local people up, but I feel it is misleading if you know it's a waste of time.

Vanessa Smith ● 6971d

They appealed to the Planning Inspectorate, who backed their appeal and overturned the decision of the Council - in this case, the B+I Area Ctte. Sarah's point about the confrontational aspect of the planning process 'winners' and 'losers' is well made.

Matt Harmer ● 6971d

When you said that they won Paul - why did they win? ... or why did the local people lose?  :-(

Sarah Felstead ● 6971d

T-Mobile appealed against Hounslow Council's decision to refuse permission for the siting of a 40-foot high mobile telephone aerial outside Redlees Park and won.

Paul Fisher ● 6971d

Well now, that is a strange comment - almost as if the people involved might have a choice in the matter and are in the position to be able to chose their fights.I don't understand why these masts can be put up on public land - side stepping planning legislation and ownership of the land too?  Can anyone explain?

Sarah Felstead ● 6971d

You have very little chance of stopping these masts - the planning legislation has really been skewed in favour of them, but you are right they did campaign against this - a lesson learned I think - just saying you don't want things doesn't mean you won't get them no matter who you are! The moral being - pick your fights.

Vanessa Smith ● 6971d

I believe the the local councillors and community safety forum were opposed to and campaigned this. What happened to their objection? was this votes on at am area committee?

Alan Sheerins ● 6971d

It is a mobile 'phone mast I believe, all joking aside.

Vanessa Smith ● 6972d

Me too - but a bit too much information as well!

Vanessa Smith ● 6972d

I have just been past - and it looks pretty sinister.  Sad for the people living around there - and the houses opposite are already bombarded with Mogdens delights.  :-(

Sarah Felstead ● 6972d

I was just about to congratulate you Kevin. Then I read your post.

The Pseudometer ● 6972d

I guess it must be the following (off the hounslow.gov.ukPlanning info).If permission was given on 13/6 they haven't wasted much time.I looked at the Ofcom sitefinder map and they don't show it yet.TimSystem Reference: P/2006/1121Planning Reference: 01137/AX/COM1(A)PROPOSAL Site description Telecommunications outside Redlees Park Twickenham Road Isleworth London TW7 7EF Application type Date received10/04/2006Details Following approval for erection of 1 x 11.7 metre high slimline mast complete with 3 antennas, one associated radio equiptment cabinet and development ancillary to existing site, details submitted pursuant to condition 10 (external finishes) of appealed permission reference 01137/AX/COM1 dated 24/03/06.Officer Tammy Riordan Tel: 0208 583 4942 DECISION Status Details Pursuant Approved 13/06/2006 APPLICANT Name John Mumby Stappard HowesAddress Heriot House Heriot Road Chertsey Surrey KT16 9DT

Tim Henderson ● 6972d