Letter to Editor: Objection to planning inspectors overturning decision on telecommunications mast on Greygoose Park

Politics / Mon 4th Mar 2024 at 11:32am

Dear Editor,

I AM writing on behalf of the residents of the area regarding the planning inspectorate overturning Harlow Council’s decision not to allow the above mast to be installed.

The residents did put forward an alternative site some 300 yards closer to Katherines Way which would have been away from houses.

We are concerned that a 15 metre Mast with various associated cabinets not only spoils the area but can also be a danger to health.

The inspectorate says there is no proof that radiation from this causes health problems, but there is also no proof it does not.

Quite close to this we also have Jerounds School with young people’s brains still developing and this radiation is a concern.

Harlow Council quite rightly refused this application.

It has been made By C K Hutchinson UK Ltd a company wholly owned by the Chinese. This is also worrying with technology now affecting most things in life.

Can you please share our concerns in Your Harlow to show how people are being ridden over by big business.

Kind regards
David Carter

Councillor Great Parndon


Editor’s Note: The planning application referred to can be found on the Harlow Council planning portal.

Look for HW/PNT/22/00539

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

17 Comments for Letter to Editor: Objection to planning inspectors overturning decision on telecommunications mast on Greygoose Park:

2024-03-04 11:42:55

Same person will be complaining when they can't get a 4G connection

2024-03-04 11:54:21

"The inspectorate says there is no proof that radiation from this causes health problems, but there is also no proof it does not" This sentence tells me everything I know about David.

Nicholas Taylor
2024-03-04 12:11:38

Well it should be remembered that it is his Party at Westminster which allows these multi national businesses to ride rough shod over public opinion and decisions made by Councils. In this case Cllr Carter is right to support residents, the mast and associated equipment is only a few metres away from the nearest house. The ironic thing is that not long ago a Planning Inspector supported residents and the Harlow Alliance Party when a resident wanted to build a house in their garden, which would it was agreed be to the detriment of the view along this ancient road. The mast will have an even worse effect and there were alternatives suggested which would not have had this effect. Lack of consistency in planning issues is a big concern.

Safer than safe
2024-03-04 13:24:15

LOL!! Are they for real LOLLLLL the proof it does not, and that they are perfectly safe is that out of millions and millions of people no one has ever been hurt by one. Idiots. Being in Greygoose Park they more likely worried it will affect the value of their houses and just using this as an excuse!! Are what’s with the underhanded racism? “a company wholly owned by the Chinese”, the Chinese what? Government? People? Takeaway? Can you be more clear?

old harlow vigilante
2024-03-04 14:58:41

cut it down when they start the work

Julie and Mark Davies
2024-03-04 15:32:43

Well good luck with that. We live along Hamstel road and there was strong objections from Park Mead and Rectory Wood for the exact same reasons, citing close to two primary schools etc And lo and behold the aesthetically ugly looking monstrosity was erected in October 2023 regardless of strong opposition. We're just the little people

Mr McGuffin
2024-03-04 15:54:43

The "Erma-gerd radiatishon shpoooky 0o0" tinfoil-hat-tomfoolery is frankly laughable. I would say the two soild arguments against the tower would be that these masts are pretty unsightly and the electrical boxes are often a target for rather eclectic and colourful "street art". These are both solvable issues-but they do need to be addressed before the shovels hits dirt.

Mark Lavender
2024-03-05 07:44:50

Julie and Mark Davies - Unless I'm mistaken - or tempting fate - the plan was to build it into the tree line past the Nisa by Ram Gorse. But how painting them green and passing them off as trees from a distance is laughable. They dwarf the streetlighting for obvious reasons: the topography for one. You wouldn't see them as prevalent in other communities, certainly not outside people's houses.

2024-03-05 09:11:10

Indisputable facts: there is no hard evidence that this technology is safe but there is hard evidence the masts and cabinets are unsightly. I am sure 'Safer than safe' would not want one less than 10 metres from their house!

2024-03-05 10:24:24

Safer than safe. They would hurt if you walked into one.

2024-03-05 11:23:29

Thanks Eddie, hopefully safer than safe will take that on board!

2024-03-05 12:03:40

P.S. I meant to thank Safer than safe for publishing their findings on the safety of 5G mast technology. Is this classed as hard evidence?

Julie and Mark Davies
2024-03-05 13:06:05

Mark Lavender - You're right there was talk of siting it past the Nisa store , but went back to original plan by houses along Hamstel road, a new "tree" !!! Similar objections in Church Langley by Ashworth Place . Last we heard residents were seeking a judicial review. Too late for us but who knows.

Julie and Mark Davies
2024-03-05 13:11:03

Mark L You're right there was talk of a different site , but reverted back to Park Mead. Church Langley residents we seeking a judicial review, so who knows Too late for us

Julie and Mark Davies
2024-03-05 13:13:44

Yes Mark you're correct there was talk of a different site at one point

M & J
2024-03-05 13:29:32

Mark L You're right there was talk of the mast being sited nearby Nisa Store , but went back to original plan so we now have new "tree" !!!

Julie and Mark Davies
2024-03-05 13:49:33

Sorry didn't mean to send that many posts but looked like they weren't on going through !!! Last one - no more !

Leave a Comment Below:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *