In 1985, the Thatcher Conservative Government granted the newly deregulated mobile-phone companies permitted development rights to erect telecommunications masts up to 15 m in height. This dilution of planning control led to a proliferation of insensitively sited mobile-phone masts across the United Kingdom, prompting large-scale public hostility. After the publication of the Stewart Report in 2000, which pointed to the possible risks to people's psychological health from antennae radiation emissions, the newly devolved planning administrations of the United Kingdom conducted reviews of these permitted development rights. The author examines these reviews and the decisions that emerged from them. It is argued that the differentiated approach to mobile phone mast control that has resulted represents an early and important departure from what was, arguably, a unified planning system within the United Kingdom.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aberdeen City Council, 2001, “Report to the Planning Committee”, 8 November, Aberdeen City Council, St Nicholas House, Aberdeen
2.
AldenJ, 2001, “Devolution since Kilbrandon and scenarios for the future of spatial planning in the United Kingdom and European Union”International Planning Studies6117–132
3.
AllmendingerP, 2001, “The head and the heart: national identity and urban planning in a devolved Scotland”International Planning Studies633–54
4.
BeggHPollockS, 1991, “Development plans in Scotland since 1975”Scottish Geographical Magazine1074–11
5.
Belfast Telegraph1997, “Orange phones under attack”, 20 November, page 3
6.
Belfast Telegraph1999, “Clashes at meeting over phone masts” 5 January, page 2
7.
Belfast Telegraph2000, “MP leads call for overhaul of mobile phone mast laws”, 17 May, page 3
8.
Belfast Telegraph2001, “Phone firms hit out at mast laws”, 25 July, page 4
9.
Bracewell-MilnesB, 2001Is A Mast a Must?: How to Fight Off Intruders (Book Guild, Lewes, Sussex)
10.
British Medical Association, 1998Health and Environmental Impact Assessment: An Integrated Approach (Earthscan Publications, London)
11.
Cabinet Office, 1985Lifting the Burden Cmnd 9571 (HMSO, London)
12.
Conservative Party, 2000Mobile Phone Masts: A Common Sense ApproachConservative Research Department, 32 Smith Square, London SW1P 3HH
13.
CPRE, 2001, “Mobile phone mast controls still inadequate”, press release 12/01, 16 March, Council for the Protection of Rural England, Warwick House, 25 Buckingham Palace Road, London SW1W OPP
14.
Department of Health, 2000, “Government issues response to the Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones and Health”, press release ref 2000/0270, 11 May, Department of Health, Richmond House, 79 Whitehall, London SW1A 2NL
15.
DETR, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, Eland House, Bressenden Place, London SW1E 5DU
16.
DETR, 1997, “Richard Caborn announces greater emphasis on mast sharing”, press release 432, 4 November
17.
DETR, 1998Modernising Planning
18.
DETR, 1999Planning for Telecommunications circular 4/99 (The Stationery Office, London)
19.
DETR, 2000Telecommunications Mast Development Consultation Paper
20.
DETR, 2001a, “Better public consultation on mobile phone masts”, news release 142, 16 March
21.
DETR, 2001bThe Government's Response to the Tenth Report of the Trade and Industry Committee: Mobile Phone Masts
22.
DoE, Department of the Environment, Eland House, Bressenden Place, London SW1E 5DU
DoE, 1996aTelecommunications Prior Approval Procedures: Code of Best Practice
25.
DoE, 1996b, “New code of practice launched for siting telecommunications masts”, press release 153, 29 March
26.
DTI, 1998Benchmarking for the Digital Economy— Supporting document to Our Competitive Future: Building the Knowledge Driven EconomyDepartment of Trade and Industry (The Stationery Office, London)
27.
DTI, 2000a, “Byers announces 3G mobile licence winners”, news release P/2000/296, 27 April, Department of Trade and Industry, Victoria Street, London SW1H OET
28.
DTI, 2000b, “Supplementary evidence from Department of Trade and Industry”, presented to the Transport and Environment Committee of the Scottish Parliament Report on inquiry into the proposals to introduce new planning procedures for telecommunicatons developments (2000) (Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh)
29.
DTLR, 2001Planning Policy Guidance 8: TelecommunicationsDepartment for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, Eland House, Bressenden Place, London SW1E 5DU
30.
Federation of the Electronics Industry, 2001, “Memorandum submitted by the Federation of the Electronics Industry”, presented to the Trade and Industry Committee of the House of Commons' inquiry in to mobile phone masts (2001), House of Commons, London
31.
Financial Times1999, “Masts that take a leaf out of nature's book”, 29 October, page 14
Financial Times2001g, “3G may prove to be a tough connection for telecoms trader”, 24 August, page 23
40.
Financial Times2001h, “Power grid pylons to be used for 3G signal”, 8 October, page 29
41.
FordR, 2001, “Planning for a new telecommunications network in the UK”Journal of Planning and Environment Law September, 1033–1042
42.
GrahamS, 1991, “Telecommunications and the local economy: some emerging policy issues”Local Economy6116–128
43.
GrahamSMarvinS, 1996Telecommunications and the City: Electronic Spaces, Urban Places (Routledge, London)
44.
Hansard1996a, Volume 272, Columns 1179–1186, 1 March, House of Commons (The Stationery Office, London)
45.
Hansard1996b, Volume 284, Columns 563–583, 30 October, House of Commons (The Stationery Office, London)
46.
Hansard2000, Volume 359, Columns 113–120, 6 December, House of Commons (The Stationery Office, London)
47.
Hansard2001a, Volume 362, Columns 1034–1042, 24 January, House of Commons (The Stationery Office, London)
48.
Hansard2001b, Volume 366, Columns 908–911, 28 February, House of Commons (The Stationery Office, London)
49.
HM Government, 1984, Telecommunications Act Public General Acts—Elizabeth II chapter 12 (The Stationery Office, London)
50.
HM Government, 1985Statutory Instrument 1985 No. 1981. The Town and Country Planning General Development (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 1985 (HMSO, London)
51.
HM Government, 1992Statutory Instrument 1992 No. 2450. The Town and Country Planning General Development (Amendment) (No. 6) Order 1992 (HMSO, London)
52.
HM Government, 1993Planning (General Development) Order (Northern Ireland) 1993 (SR1993 No. 278) (The Stationery Office, Belfast)
53.
HolmesD, 2001, “The balance between feared and real risks”Planning 30 March, page 22
54.
House of Commons, 1999Mobile Phones and Health Third Report, Session 1998 – 99, HC 489 –I (The Stationery Office, London)
55.
House of Commons, 2001Mobile Phone Masts Tenth Report, Session 2000–2001, HC 330 (The Stationery Office, London)
56.
Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones, 2000Mobile Phones and HealthNational Radiological Protection Board, Chilton, Didcot, Oxon OX11 ORQ
57.
JessopB, 1995, “The future of the nation state: erosion or reorganisation?”, WP 50 (governance series), Lancaster Regionalism Group, Department of Sociology, University of Lancaster, Lancaster
58.
LloydM G, 1997, “Structures and cultures: regional planning and institutional innovation in Scotland”, in Nationality and Planning in Scotland and Wales Eds MacDonaldRThomasH (Cardiff University Press, Cardiff) pp 113–132
59.
Manchester City Council, 2001Inquiry into Telecommuniations Masts. Report to the Physical Environment Overview and Scrutiny CommitteeManchester City Council, Town Hall, Albert Square, Manchester M60 2LA
60.
MorrisJ (Ed.), 2000Rethinking Risk and the Precautionary Principle (Institute of Economic Affairs, London)
61.
Nabarro Nathanson, Telecom Estates Ltd, 2000Rooftop Rents: Mobile Phone Aerial SitesNabarro Nathanson, Lacon House, Theobald's Road, London
62.
National Assembly for Wales, 2000Telecommunications Mast Development (By Telecommunications Code System Operators)—Consultation PaperNational Assembly for Wales, Cardiff Bay, Cardiff CF99 1NA
63.
National Assembly for Wales, 2001, “Sue Essex announces changes to mobile phone mast planning guidelines”, press release 6 April, National Assembly for Wales, Cardiff Bay, Cardiff CF99 1NA
64.
National Audit Office, 2001The Auction of Radio Spectrum for the Third Generation of Mobile Telephones. Report by the Comptroller and Auditor GeneralHouse of Commons, HC233, Session 2001–2002 (The Stationery Office, London)
65.
Newport Borough Council v Secretary of State for Wales and Browning & Ferris Environmental Services CA [1998] JPL 377
66.
Northern Ireland Assembly, 2001, “Assembly's Environment Committee takes a stand on phone masts”, press release 109/01, 9 April, Northern Ireland Assembly, Parliament Buildings, Stormont, Belfast BT4 3XX
Oftel, 1999Oftel Statement on National RoamingOffice of Telecommunications, 50 Ludgate Hill, London
70.
Oftel, 2001Market Information—Mobile UpdateOffice of Telecommunications, 50 Ludgate Hill, London
71.
Orange, 2001Memorandum Submitted by Orange evidence presented to the Trade and Industry Committee of the House of Commons inquiry into mobile phone masts, 2001, House of Commons, London
72.
Planning2001, “RTPI urges caution on pylon cancer risk”, 9 March, page 1
73.
PowellK, 2001, “Devolution, planning guidance and the role of the planning system in Wales”International Planning Studies6215–222
74.
Press and Journal2000, “Anger in Newburgh at appearance of mast”, 28 November, page 3
75.
Press and Journal2001, “Phone firm falls foul of planners' health fears”, 11 August, page 5
76.
Regina v Tandridge District Council and another, ex parte Al Fayed1999 EGCS 6
77.
Scotland on Sunday1997, “Mobile phone mast cancer scare”, 2 March, page 10
78.
Scotland on Sunday2001, “Planning rules ‘pose threat’ to digital growth”, 16 December, Business section, page 3
79.
Scottish Executive, 1999Memorandumfrom the Scottish Executive—The Town and Country Planning System and Telecommunications Development evidence presented to the Transport and Environment Committee of the Scottish Parliament's inquiry into the proposals to introduce new planning procedures for telecommunications developments, 2000, Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh, EH99 1SP
80.
Scottish Executive, 2000a, “Boyack responds positively to inquiry into telecommunications developments”, press release SE1308/2000, 9 May, Scottish Executive, St Andrew's House, Regent Road, Edinburgh EH1 3DG
81.
Scottish Executive, 2000b, “Boyack to consult on full planning control for new mobile telephone masts”, press release SE2304/2000, 25 August, Scottish Executive, St Andrew's House, Regent Road, Edinburgh EH1 3DG
82.
Scottish Executive, 2000c, “Sam Galbraith proposes tighter controls on mobile phone masts”, press release SE3032/2000, 24 November, Scottish Executive, St Andrew's House, Regent Road, Edinburgh EH1 3DG
83.
Scottish Executive, 2001aNational Planning Policy Guideline NPPG 19: Radio TelecommunicationsScottish Executive, St Andrew's House, Regent Road, Edinburgh EH1 3DG
84.
Scottish Executive Development Department, 2001Planning Advice Note PAN62: Radio TelecommunicationsScottish Executive Development Department, Victoria Quay, Edinburgh EH6 6QQ
85.
Scottish Office, 1998aReview of Planning Procedures Relating to Telecommunications EquipmentScottish Office, St Andrew's House, Regent Road, Edinburgh EH1 3DG
86.
Scottish Office, 1998b, “Tougher controls on mobile phone masts”, news release 1539/98, 31 July, Scottish Office, St Andrew's House, Regent Road, Edinburgh EH1 3DG
87.
Scottish Parliament, 2000Report on Inquiry into the Proposals to Introduce New Planning Procedures for Telecommunications DevelopmentsTransport and the Environment Committee, 3rd Report, Session 1, Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh EH99 1SP
88.
Scottish Parliament, 2001, “Scottish Executive's telecomms planning proposals ‘do not go far enough’ says parliamentary committee”, news release CTRAN 0005/2001, 16 February, Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh EH99 1SP
89.
StanleyN, 1998, “Public concern: the decision-makers dilemma”Journal of Planning and Environment Law October, 919–934
90.
Tewdwr-JonesM, 2001a, “Grasping the thistle: the search for distinctiveness in the devolved Scottish planning system”International Planning Studies6199–214
91.
Tewdwr-JonesM, 2001b, “Planning and the National Assembly for Wales: generating distinctiveness and inclusiveness in a new political context”European Planning Studies9553–562
92.
The Daily Telegraph2001, “Labour backtracks on mobile phone masts”, 17 March, page 5
The Times2001a, “Mobile phone firms can share 3G masts”, 5 May, page 51
98.
The Times2001b, “Man sues phone firm over mobile mast next door”, 1 January, page 5
99.
Vodafone, 2001Memorandum Submitted by Vodafone evidence presented to the Trade and Industry Committee of the House of Commons inquiry into mobile phone masts (2001) (House of Commons, London)
100.
WaltonW, 2001, “Telecommunications control: a UK-wide overview”Scottish Planning and Environmental Law87104–106
101.
WaltonWHolmesD, 1996, “The use of permitted rights by telecommunications operators”Journal of Planning and Environment Law December, 995–1003
