By Grant Smith

DUNDEE UNIVERSITY researchers have found “deep public concern, frustration and cynicism” that councils are not allowed to consider possible health effects when deciding on planning applications for mobile phone masts.

People are said to think of the telecoms industry as “insensitive to local concerns and driven by the profit motive” and are not convinced the planning system protects communities properly.

Councillors reported that they too were upset at not being able to take their constituents’ health fears into account. But industry representatives said they believed there were “rogue councils” which either imposed unreasonable conditions on planning consent or made “incorrect” refusals of applications.

The research was carried out for the Scottish Executive by a team from the university’s school of town and regional planning, including its head Professor Greg Lloyd. It looked at the effect of planning controls on the development of mobile telecoms introduced in 2001.

Overall, the system was said by councils and phone operators to be working “as well as can be expected” but the public remained unconvinced.

There has been no shortage of examples of just how much opposition masts can provoke.

The researchers said the new rules had been drawn up to balance the need for the efficient roll-out of telecoms infrastructure against public sensitivity about siting, design and health considerations.

A national planning policy NPPG 19 stated that the role of the local authority planning system was to address concerns about siting and design, but radio frequency transmissions were not allowed to be taken into account because these were controlled by other bodies.

The industry also created its own guidelines, promising greater consultation with communities and councils, support for health research and compliance with international standards on emissions.

The researchers said that while there had been some improvements, “There is frustration that the planning system is confined to matters of siting and design. The findings suggest that the public remain unconvinced...as to the protection afforded communities by the planning system.”

Interviews with councillors found they thought the 2001 planning policies had given them more control over mast development, but they had a “strong impression” the regulations “did not allow them to represent the health concerns of constituents.”

While they understood the NPPG 19, “at local level, however, health concerns are probably the predominant issue.”

Some councillors complained of “tokenistic gestures” by operators who contacted them directly before applications were made, but offered no real opportunity to exert influence.

The researchers said, “There were instances where elected members proactively contacted operators, for example, to encourage site-sharing…but this did not lead to dialogue with the operators. Moreover, there was evidence that even in cases where the local community had expressed deep reservations on the grounds of visual amenity, operators were not prepared to re-site equipment.”

Co-operation between operators was accepted in principle, but in practice the companies appeared to find site-sharing technically obstructive.

The industry was “very aware of the public concerns about health” but the Mobile Operators Association pointed out that 3.5 million people in Scotland used mobile phones.

“Whilst the benefits of mobile telephony are part of Scotland’s lifestyle and to be welcomed, the infrastructure is not,” the researchers said. “It is evident that wider public understanding of the technical requirements of the industry…is required.”

Operators complained of “politically-driven” decisions and “rogue authorities.”

The researchers looked at appeals against the refusal of planning permission for masts between 2000 and 2002. Some areas produced no appeals at all, while others had several. There were six for applications in Perth and Kinross, all were sustained.

“Without a detailed analysis of each appeal, it is not possible to draw clear conclusions.”

There was, however, evidence of a more bullish approach by operators to challenge decisions they believed to be bad or unfair.

It was possible, the researchers concluded, that the number of planning appeals would increase “in view of the intensification of mast development due to 3G and the general decline in the availability of sites in the more built-up areas.”

Both local authorities and industry realised more work was needed at local level to build trust as “mast development appears to have been undertaken in an insensitive way, particularly in the eyes of local communities.”