Plans for two 5G masts were approved last night (Wednesday, June 3), after an independent review into health concerns was carried out.
A “huge” 5G tower in Southcote was approved at the Reading Borough Council (RBC) planning meeting, despite one councillor's concerns it would “stand out like a sore thumb”.
Voting on the Burghfield Road 5G tower proposal was delayed last month, as some councillors called for an independent review into safety concerns and others wanted to make sure the mast would be camouflaged.
READ MORE: Reading could be getting a new cinema but Waitrose and others concerned
The other approved plan is the replacement of antennas at a mast on top of a student accommodation block on Kings Road to allow for 5G connection.
An independent review into 5G has now been published by the council, which states: “The local planning authority will require that the operator provides a declaration or certificate to confirm compliance with ICNIRP guidance.
“Clearly, planning officers do not have the scientific expertise to scrutinize the data provided but can check that the applicant has addressed the relevant guidance.
“Should a health concern arise it will fall to Ofcom and the HSE to monitor and address.”
Addressing the Burghfield Road application’s camouflaging issue , applicant Wireless Infrastructure Group agreed to construct the mast in a fir green colour finish, which officers have deemed suitable in the context of the surrounding countryside and which satisfied most councillors.
Lib Dem councillor Ricky Duveen, however, said the 25m mast will “stand out like big sore thumb” and he is “not interested in what colour it is”.
Councillor John Ennis said the benefits far outweigh the negatives.
Cllr McKenna, chairman of the committee, added “it is better to have one big mast than a plethora of others” and said the green colour would help.
The other approved planned will add 5G capability to Berkshire House, on Kings Road.
Reading Borough Council’s Planning Applications committee approved both plans last night (Wednesday, June 3).
Meanwhile, plans at a 'fine' Edwardian house were rejected for a third time at the meeting.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here