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, Adrian

I will be out of the office starting 11/07/2008 and will not return until
28/07/2008.

If you have any urgent queries please contact the Marketing and
Communications Unit on 028 9250 9220 or I will contact you on my return.

This message has been scanned by MailController - www.MailController.altohiway.com

Dear Adrian,

Thank you for your Freedom of Information enquiry, received by Lisburn City
Council on the 16th July.

I wish to advise you that your query should be sent to the Divisional
Planning Office in Downpatrick, Co Down, as this is a Planning matter, and
as such should be directed to the appropriate authority. Lisburn City
Council cannot therefore provide you with a response. I wish you all the
best in your communications regarding this matter.

Thank you.
Alison Goddard
Assistant Director of Corporate Services
Lisburn City Council

Adrian
<request-1188-1f8
601c3@whatdotheyk To
now.com> FOI requests at Lisburn Borough
Council <[Lisburn City Council request email]>
16/07/2008 13:02 cc

Subject
Freedom of Information request -
Masts

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, Adrian

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be
published on the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/about...

Is [Lisburn City Council request email] the wrong address for Freedom of Information
requests to Lisburn Borough Council? If so please let us know by
emailing [WhatDoTheyKnow contact email] - we'll make sure future ones go
to the right place.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

This message has been scanned by MailController -
www.MailController.altohiway.com