Giant 5G mast is recommended for approval in Milton Keynes

The planning application, which has been made by the council, is set to be debated at a meeting of Milton Keynes Council’s development control committee on Thursday.

The proposed Peartree Bridge mast is one of seven that the council intends to use for a trial of 5G technology, including on improving data at the nearby MK Hospital. Organisations included in the trial include Chinese tech giant Huawei.

With concerns flooding in to the council from 38 neighbours, and Woughton Community Council, the committee is set to hear a range of opinions at its virtual meeting.

Residents near the site, which is opposite a garage that is used as a car wash at Waterside, have objected for a range of reasons, including that it would be detrimental to the area, and because they believe that 5G technology poses a risk to health.

A planners’ report being put to councillors says they consider that the proposal “would not have a significant detrimental impact upon the appearance or character of the area or to residents.”

And on health concerns, they say that “a reason for refusal based on concerns about the impact of the development on public health could not be substantiated.”

The report says that a “large number of objections have been received from residents of the borough to the principle of rolling out a 5G Network whilst the potential public health risks are unknown”.

The planners respond: “The proposed development, in particular, poses no threat to public health providing it complies with the emission levels set out by the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP).

“Local planning authorities must determine applications on planning grounds only and should not question the need for an electronic communications system, or set health safeguards different from the International Commission guidelines for public exposure.”

The council has also received concerns that it is the applicant as well as the decision maker.

But they say that planning regulations do allow for this to happen.

One objector who is due to speak at this week’s meeting said that the planners’ report is “riddled with inaccuracies, clearly intended to create a very misleading impression.” She says the report has not mentioned homes in Woodley Headland nor houseboats in the marina.

“The mast would have a hugely negative effect on the character of the neighbourhood,” she adds.

“The mast would be more than twice as tall as trees and homes in neighbouring Jeeves Close.”