‘Excessive and intrusive’ 5G mast plans blocked

Plans had been submitted for a 15m 5G mast in Earith to "improve network coverage"

Plans to build a 15m (49ft) tall 5G mast that was branded "excessive and intrusive" have been blocked.

A planning inspector has upheld Huntingdonshire District Council’s decision to refuse permission for the proposed mast on the High Street in Earith, Cambridgeshire.

CK Hutchison Networks (UK) Ltd had applied to build the mast with H3G (Three) operating it, in order to provide "improved network coverage and capacity".

They appealed the council’s decision to refuse permission, but the planning inspector said the mast would harm the Earith Conservation Area and "the character and appearance of the area".

The planning application said there was a "recognised need to expand and promote telecommunications networks", and said using land on the public highway for the infrastructure was compliant with central government and local planning policy.

However, Earith Parish Council had objected to the plans and 10 formal objections were lodged by people living nearby.

Various concerns were raised, including that the mast and the associated cabinets might impact the safety of people using the shared cycle and footpath.

One person did submit a comment formally in support of the plans and said they believed the positives would outweigh the negatives.

The mast would spoil the character of Earith's "semi-rural setting", according to the planning inspector

Huntingdonshire District Council decided to refuse permission, saying the mast's "excessive height" in a "prominent location" would be "visually harmful and intrusive".

CK Hutchison Networks appealed this decision, but it was upheld by the planning inspector.

The inspector said: "The design of this apparatus would be seen as an obtrusive piece of street furniture and appear unusual and incongruous within this semi-rural setting, and would thus harm the character and appearance of the area."

They added that only "limited detail" had been provided as to why alternative sites for the 5G mast in the village were discounted.

"I am not satisfied that, based on the evidence, the appeal scheme represents the least harmful option," they concluded.