000			01934cam a2200265 4500
001			ABS68762
008			031219n2005 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u128952
100			_aFranklin, K.
245		2	_aA potential threat to kids' health is no reason to override policy
260			_c2005
490			_aArchitects' Journal _v221(7) 24 February 2005, 48(1)
520			_aComments on "T-Mobile (UK) Ltd and others v First SoS and another" ([2004] EWCA Civ 1763, Times 16 November 2004), which concentrated on a T-Mobile telecommunications mast in use since 2001. In 2003 permission was sought to build a more substantial mast so that two additional companies could fix a further nine antennae and six dishes. The council refused on the grounds that the proposed mast would detract unreasonably from the local amenities. The planning inspector dismissed the appeal but on different grounds from the planners by arguing that the masts were a health risk, particularly as the base stations were to be situated near schools. The inspector relied upon the government's independent Stewart Group recommendations that assumed young children may be particularly vulnerable to the effects of electromagnetic radiation. The CA, in overturning its decision, found that these considerations had meant that the planning inspector had departed from government policy. While he was entitled to consider health issues he would have to prove that they were an exceptional threat; the telecommunications mast's proposed beam was not exceptional.
590			_aABS
650			_aT-MOBILE (UK) LTD AND OTHERS V FIRST SOS AND ANOTHER
650			_aMOBILE PHONE MASTS
650			_aSTEWART REPORT
650			_aBASE STATIONS
650			_aHEALTH RISKS
650			_aPPG8
650			_aTELECOMMUNICATIONS
650			_aPLANNING PERMISSION
690			_aENVIRONMENTAL AND LAND CONSULTANCY-PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
942			_n0
999			_c74885 _d74885