Woodcock Hill community rise up against plans for a 20 metre phone mast in a wildlife corridor.

 

The group of trees affected by the mast planning application

The mast and cabinet. The mast is twice the height of the tallest trees

 

The planning application for the erection of a 20 metre telecommunication mast in Woodcock Hill has encountered tough local opposition. The location is a rare green space that locals, working with St Gregory's School, had hoped to turn into a community garden. There are 31 objections on the Brent Planning Portal including from St Gregory's School, the CPRE, Friends of Woodcock Park and Northwick Park Residents' Association.

There are concerns about the stability of the bank next to the Wealdstone Brook if tree roots are damaged by escavation and the bank is an Environment Agency flood asset.  The area is known to suffer from subsidence and sink holes. Beneath the land there is believed to be a trunk sewer, gas lines, a water main and telecommunication lines. 

The group of trees is part of a wildlife corridor and the area around Wealdstone Brook is designated a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation.The mast is proposed to be situated in a woodland of 5 trees, including 4 oaks 10 metres tall in front of a mix of Prunus, False Acacia, Ash and Maples. They are 40 metres from the facing houses on Kenton Road

Many residents in the streets surrounding the site say that they did not receive a consultation letter, despite Brent Council claims that they were sent, and the site notice was not posted until the school holidays had started.

PLANNING REFERENCE 24/1890

Location Street Record, Woodcock Hill, Harrow Proposal Prior approval for installation of a 20m monopole supporting 6 no. antennas, 2 no. transmission dishes, 2 no. equipment cabinets and ancillary development thereto on land at Wealdstone Brook rear of 75-79 Woodgrange Avenue, Harrow, HA3 0XG

OBJECTORS

CPRE London is a membership-based charity with 2500 members across London, concerned with the preservation and enhancement of London's vital green spaces, as well as the improvement of London's environment for the health and wellbeing of all Londoners.

We are writing to object to the above application on the following basis:

 - The height and bulk of the proposed mast is out of character with the local area.

- We are also concerned that the development could damage trees and disturb the nearby wildlife corridor, home to a variety of wildlife including bats and more than twenty species of birds.

The Friends of Woodock Park have objected as follows: 

The Friends of Woodcock Park are objecting to the planning application for the installation of a mobile phone mast.

The mast is not in keeping with the local environment. It is on the edge of Woodcock Park and in a residential street.

We are very concerned about the installation of a phone mast in such close proximity to St Gregory's High School and also to Bright Start Nursery School located in the Methodist Church opposite the proposed location. As you are aware St Gregory's School is within 100m of the proposed site, however the School is currently using the car park in Woodcock Park for temporary classrooms whilst the RAAC problem is dealt with in the main school. Pupils in these temporary classrooms will be in closer proximity to the mast. Students will have to walk past the proposed mast twice a day to enter the School, increasing their exposure to high intensity EMF radiation from the 5G masts. This exposure will impact their health and well-being.

Brent should adopt the PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE and not have 5G Masts near schools. Brent would be liable for any potential legal actions taken in the future. in her letter of 27 February 2020, to the minister at the Dept of Digital Culture Media and Sport (DDCMS), Wera Hobhouse MP quotes DLA Piper - solicitors to Public Health England (PHE) now UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), who themselves rely in ICNIRP guidelines - as saying:

"A public body must determine how much weight to put on the PHE guidance. Equally that body must determine what other evidence from your client or other members of the public or interested parties to consider in making any decision. If it be alleged that a public body now or in the future acted unlawfully in placing reliance on the guidance, that cannot retrospectively taint the guidance with illegality." This underlines the fact that, if you rely on ICNIRP, it is the council - not the ICNIRP guidance or its issuer - are liable. And, do you as a council know that the ICNIRP 1998 guidelines state that the prevention of harm and advice about interference is beyond the scope of ICNIRP?

The proposed location is on valuable green space, managed by Brent Parks, not on the Highway. The masts should not be installed on park land. Have they permissions to install here? Brent Parks have already agreed a project for a community flower garden in this same area. It will be more difficult to maintain the grass area around the mast, thereby increasing costs to Brent Council.

The cabinets will attract graffiti and fly-tipping both already a problem in this area, at more cost to the Council.

We are also concerned about the effect of this mast on the wildlife, especially the birds and the bats which forage along the Wealdstone Brook. and on the trees nearby. The Bat Conservation Trust recommend that "the erection of masts should be carefully considered, locating the mast on a part of the building as far from known roosting locations and flight paths as possible." The area around the Wealdstone Brook is designated a SINC site.

The higher frequencies used in 5G technology are known to be particularly damaging to insect and bird populations. A 2018 study showed how the shorter wavelengths in higher frequencies are absorbed more easily by insects' bodies, creating a heating effect. There were increases in absorbed power up to 370% when the insects, including honeybees, were exposed to these frequencies, with detrimental effects on their behaviour and health.

The installation of a mast on the opposite side of the park has resulted in at least 2 silver birch trees dying. These had to be removed this year at a cost to the council. The loss of trees at the proposed site would be very serious, as the roots hold the banks of the Wealdstone Brook together. No cabinets or masts should interfere with tree roots.

The area of Woodcock Hill itself is known to flood and this will add to the flood risk.

We believe the area is located over a trunk sewer. Confirmation should be sought from Thames Water prior to any approval, as they do not permit development over a trunk sewer.

This installation will not enhance biodiversity and may even have a negative effect, contrary to Brent Councils promotion and enhancement and use of the Blue Ribbon network: a. Proposals for development adjacent to river and canal edges are required to improve access to the waterways and provide an appropriate landscaped set-back which may include public open space. b. Developments adjacent to the Blue Ribbon network and other tributaries, or waterways with potential to negatively impact on its water quality will be required to contribute towards restoration and naturalisation of waterways, and seek to enhance water quality and biodiversity in accordance with the objectives of the Water Framework Directive and Thames River Basin Management Plan.

 Northwick Park Residents' Association object:

On behalf of the Northwick Park Residents' Association, we wish to formally object to the above-referenced planning application for the installation of a telecommunications mast on Wealdstone Brook, opposite 12 Woodcock Hill.

Our association represents the views of numerous residents, many of whom live within proximity to the proposed site. Our objections are based on the following key concerns:

1. Preservation of Valued Green Space and Wildlife 

The proposed installation site is located on a cherished green space that supports a diverse range of wildlife. Over the years, residents have actively collaborated with Brent Council to enhance this area by expanding flower beds and promoting biodiversity at this end of Kenton/Woodcock Hill. The installation of a 5G telecommunications mast on this land threatens to disrupt the delicate ecosystem, negatively impacting the flora and fauna that the community has worked hard to nurture and protect.

2. Environmental and Health Risks 

There is growing evidence that continuous exposure to non-ionising microwave radiation, such as that emitted by 5G equipment, has a detrimental impact on living organisms, including animals, birds, insects, and plants. For example, birds may abandon their nests, suffer from deteriorating health, and face increased mortality rates. Similarly, the bee population, crucial for pollination and agriculture, could experience colony collapse and navigational disruptions. The long-term effects on soil-based micro-organisms, plants, and trees are also of significant concern.

In addition to environmental risks, we are deeply concerned about the potential health impacts on residents. The EU report EPRS_ST and other scientific studies provide substantial evidence of the carcinogenicity of RF-EMF radiation in humans. We have linked these documents below (Sub517) that has been acknowledged by the Australian Government, highlighting the need for caution. We urge Brent Council to carefully review this evidence and to refrain from approving this application.

3. Proximity to St Gregory's School 

 
The proposed site is less than 100 meters from St Gregory's School, which is one of the top 50 schools in England, educating around 1,700 students aged 11 to 17. These students pass by the proposed installation, exposing them to potentially harmful levels of EMF radiation. The potential health risks to these young people, whose well-being should be a priority, cannot be ignored. The evidence attached to this objection further supports our concerns.

Conclusion 

 
In conclusion, the Northwick Park Residents' Association strongly opposes this planning application due to the significant risks it poses to the local environment, wildlife, and the health of residents, particularly the students at St Gregory's School. We strongly urge Brent Council to reject this application and to take into consideration the long-term implications for our community.
Should the Council proceed with approval, please be advised that Northwick Park Residents' Association, alongside the residents and parents of students at St Gregory's School and the wider community, will hold the Council fully responsible for any adverse health outcomes resulting from this decision.

We trust that you will give due consideration to our concerns and make a decision that prioritises the safety and well-being of our community.

Links:
EU Health impact of 5G https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/69001
2/EPRS_STU(2021)690012_EN.pdf

5G THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/109394/pdf/

Ask Mayoral and GLA candidates to support the 'More Natural Capital' proposals - details in this post

 From CPRE London on behalf of the More Natural Capital coalition

In the run up to the elections on 6 May we urge you to ask all the candidates for Mayor of London and the London Assembly to support the More Natural Capital proposals and encourage your family and friends to do likewise. Details of the election candidates can be found here: https://www.londonelects.org.uk/im-voter/candidates

More information about all the issues in the More Natural Capital manifesto and the groups involved can be found on the Wildlife and Countryside Link website here: https://www.wcl.org.uk/london-mayoral-election-blogs.asp

You can find out more about CPRE London's Ten New Parks campaign here https://www.cprelondon.org.uk/news/lets-create-ten-major-new-parks-for-london-now/

You can find out more about Ramblers initiative to promote six new green walking routes in London here: https://www.ramblers.org.uk/news/latest-news/2021/april/london-ramblers-launch-greenways-map-in-bid-for-six-new-green-walking-routes.aspx

How big a problem is traffic noise in Brent's parks?

The Campaign to Protect Rural England published a report today on traffic noise in London parks.
There is a PDF for each London borough. I have published the Brent report at the end of this article.

The research

· Noise maps were created for all the main parks in London, a total of 885, and set out in a separate document for each borough

· Using official, publicly available data, the noise levels were assessed for each park depending on the proportion of the park which was impacted by noise. Each park was categorised accordingly and the data was collated 


· A note was also made where parks were completely free from noise; where the whole park was noisy; and where the noise was particularly loud 
The findings 


· Almost a third – one in three – (29%) of the 885 London parks surveyed are severely impacted by traffic noise (defined as meaning that 50% to 100% of the park is impacted by traffic noise of 55 decibels or above) 


· The results were wide-ranged. Sutton has the fewest parks (7%) severely impacted by traffic noise and Enfield has the most (57%) 


· South London parks are quieter. All South London Boroughs except one, Lambeth, have a figure below the median for percentage of parks severely impacted by noise (see Table 2 p23) 


· Being an Inner or Outer London borough does not mean and having noisier or quieter parks 


· Fewer than half (44%) of the London parks surveyed are completely free from traffic noise 


· Around one in five (18%) of the parks surveyed are completely noisy i.e. traffic noise of 55 decibels or above can be heard everywhere in the park 


· A quarter (25%) of London’s parks are impacted by particularly loud noise defined as being where at least one quarter of the park is impacted by noise of 60 decibels or above 


Noise in parks matters because: 

· People are less likely to use parks when they are noisy, so benefits are lost 


· The key amenity benefit of access to tranquillity is lost when parks are noisy 


· There is strong correlation between noise and air pollution from traffic, so where 
people are exposed to noise, they are also exposed to air pollution 


· Noise contributes towards a range of physical and mental health problems 


· Noise impacts negatively on wildlife 


· Where the local park is noisy, local communities will de facto be experiencing a 
deficiency in green space which does not register in assessments

RECOMMENDATIONS


London Boroughs, the Mayor and Transport for London need to work together to: 


· Permanently remove traffic from roads impacting parks by re-routing traffic; by introducing traffic filtering (e.g. resident access only, or cycle access and emergency vehicle access only) and speed limits; or by pedestrianising streets near to parks, to reduce traffic levels 
 

 

·      Introduce regular, temporary road closures, like Sunday closures of the Mall in St James’ Park 


· Investigate ways to mitigate noise, for example by the use of noise barriers, noise reducing road surfaces and natural features, including planting hedgerows 
Assessments of deficiency / sufficiency in greenspace should include an assessment of the amenity or quality of the green space, including taking noise levels into account. 
London and National Policy should be revised so that assessments of deficiency in greenspace take account of whether the amenity or quality of the space is seriously impacted by noise (and concomitant air) pollution, rather than simply assessing the amount of space and its distance from residents/users. 
Green Flag Awards assessments should consider giving more weight to noise reduction and mitigation for parks severely impacted by road noise. 


Click bottom right corner to view full size: