CAMPAIGNERS fear children will be put at risk and house prices will plummet after a decision to stop two phone masts going up in Cassiobury estate was overturned by a Government planning inspector.

Councillors blocked plans for ten-metre masts outside the Essex Arms pub in Langley Way and at the junction of Stratford Way and Cassiobury Drive.

But, following a public inquiry, Government inspector Mr Alan Rugman ruled the reasons put forward by Watford Council were not sufficient to refuse the applications.

In his report, he disagreed the masts would ruin the look of the area or were contrary to human rights and said health fears were not a valid reason for rejecting masts.

He said: "While understanding the genuine and sincerely-held anxieties of local residents, the health and safety aspects of telecommunications systems are matters on which I must be guided by Government guidelines."

This follows the introduction of revised guidelines, which state health safeguards in relation to masts are to be determined by the Government and not councils.

The decision was greeted with dismay by councillors and residents, who fought to stop the masts going up near their homes.

Watford Mast Action Committee member Mrs Sue Claret said: "We're disappointed, but we're not beaten.

"Tony Blair had one turned down in his constituency Sedgefield last year for health reasons.

"How health reasons can affect children there and not here I don't know especially when the mast at the junction of Stratford Way will be just eight metres from a child's bedroom window."

She said residents felt they had been let down by Watford Council, claiming lawyers acting for mobile phone company Orange has "made mincemeat" of the council's defence at the inquiry in September.

A further blow to those who have fought masts in the area came after another mast, planned for the Cassiobury estate, was approved at a tense council meeting on Monday, November 5.

The 12.5-metre BT Cellnet mast, at the junction of Courtlands Drive and Hempstead Road, was opposed by some members of Watford Council's new planning and licensing committee.

But chairman Geoff O'Connell used his casting vote to stop it being turned down, which was greeted with groans and tutting from objectors.

Dr Tim Peachey, of Hempstead Road, who addressed the meeting on behalf of anxious residents said it would be ugly and intrusive, and claimed alternative locations had not been fully explored.

He said: "No account has been taken of its visual impact and its effect on local amenity."

Park ward Councillor Tim Williams (Conservative) asked committee members to vote to turn down the new mast in Hempstead Road. But the move was defeated.

He said: "I still believe there are health implications from these masts and when the Orange decision came out last week, I was disappointed and extremely bitter."

Following the meeting, Councillor O'Connell (Labour, Meriden ward) defended the outcome saying: "It would be helpful for the public to accept the committee is semi-judicial and is here to make decisions based on planning law and not to make political capital.

"Distance from buildings and possible health risks from masts are no longer seen as valid reasons for refusal. So, we had no reason to stop this particular application from going ahead.

"It is also a duty of this committee to make sure we don't waste taxpayers' money on fighting planning applications we have no hope of winning."

A 22.5 metre mast will go up on land owned by Railtrack near Watford Junction Station after the planning and licensing committee agreed to grant planning permission on Monday. Antennae and dishes will bring the total height of the mast to 24.5 metres high.

November 8, 2001 19:00