X hits on this document





18 / 26


17th January 2006

It is interesting to note that the levels set by the NRBP as ‘safe’ levels of exposure to radiation are considerably higher than in some other countries where research has led to a number of scientists and scientific bodies significantly reducing their exposure levels.   At 1800 MHz (one of two frequency bands for cellular mobile phone services) the limits set in power, measured in  μWatt/cm2, are (produce table): 

International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection-



NRPB (UK)10000 

In conclusion, I wish to repeat that my purpose in addressing the committee today is to request that they reject this application for the installation of the telecommunications mast at the Thorncliffe Waste Water Station.  I believe that the residents and schoolchildren in the area should be allowed to limit the number of  masts with which they are expected to coexist and by which their health and well-being may be affected in the long term”.


Ormsgill Residents, Walney Airfield, County Highways and Estates and Development Manager all consulted

Ormsgill Residents Association

“No comment.”

Cumbria Highways

“Further to our conversation, I can confirm that there are no objections to the proposals.  The proposal is the same as the previous one (2005/0769) with additional consultation with the aerodrome so there are no further comments to make.”


The application before you today is a resubmission of application 2005/0193 which was recommended for approval but withdrawn prior to the committee meeting of the 5th April 2005 to be relocated because of ground conditions at the proposed site.  The application was then resubmitted in May but was again withdrawn because the applicant failed to notify the Civil Aviation Authority which is a statutory consultee.  

The present application is located in the same place as the second application (2005/0769) approximately 15m further from Thorncliff Road (north) than original application 05/0193. The Civil Aviation Authority have been consulted and raise no objection.

The report from the original application 2005/0193 is still relevant (changed where necessary) and completes the present report:

This is an application for planning permission, rather than a Prior Notification application, as the structure exceeds 15 metres in height.

Page 18 of 25

Document info
Document views92
Page views92
Page last viewedMon Jan 23 02:21:40 UTC 2017