July 16 2008

Dear Sir/Madam,

Recently I read an alarming report from the BBC concerning mobile
phone masts which were erected after blunders by councils in
England.

Legislation allows mobile phone companies to assume masts below 15m
in height have been given planning approval if they do not hear in
writing from a council within 56 days. The council is legally
obliged to write to the companies within the given time, outlining
whether the mast actually needs prior approval and whether or not
the council objects to its siting and appearance.

On 68 occasions, councils in southern England have fallen foul of a
legal loophole allowing masts to be approved if an operator is not
sent an answer within that set time limit. In 39 of those cases,
the council had intended to object to the application.

A catalogue of errors has been uncovered across southern England by
the BBC. They include decisions being sent by second-class mail
instead of first, letters being given the wrong date-stamp,
officers calculating the time period incorrectly, the wrong
decision notices being sent out and officers forgetting to state
clearly enough that the application had actually been refused. This
concerns this correspondent greatly.

I am therefore requesting that your council provides me with a full
disclosure on issues relating to this most serious matter under the
Freedom of Information Act 2000. I request the following specific
information:

How many instances (if at all) did your council allow masts to be
approved because an operator was not sent an answer within that set
time limit

Full details in relation to each instance (if any) as mentioned in
part one, including the size, height, and location of each mast,
the identity of the operator, and why each operator was not sent an
answer within the set time limit

Whether the council intended to object to each mast referred to in
part two

This Act established a legal right of access to information held by
public bodies and I believe the full disclosure of such material is
in the public interest and is essential for maintaining public
confidence and accountability in our local services.

I would therefore request a full disclosure in line with the
aforementioned act, within the statutory 20 day limit.

Sincerely, Concerned

I am out of the office until 17/07/2008.

Ursula Mezza
Public Relations Officer

Note: This is an automated response to your message "Freedom of
Information request - Masts" sent on 16/07/2008 12:44:43.

This is the only notification you will receive while this person is away.

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom
they are addressed.
If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the
originator of the message. This footer also confirms that this
e-mail message has been scanned for the presence of computer viruses.

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender, except where the sender specifies and with authority,
states them to be the views of Ards Borough Council.