Kentish Gazette Canterbury & District
Plans for 70ft mast on main city route rejected after huge outcry
Bid for towering 5G transmitter that would ‘ruin Cathedral view’ turned down
Plans to erect a towering 5G mast standing almost 70ft tall have been rejected following a backlash from residents.
Mobile network Three had hoped to build the imposing structure near houses in New Dover Road, Canterbury, to boost phone coverage.
But the plan sparked a widespread outcry with many residents fearing the structure would spoil historic views of Canterbury Cathedral’s World Heritage Site, along one of the key routes into the city.
If approved, the mast would have stood taller than four stacked double-decker buses.
Three wanted to site it on a prominent grassy island in New Dover Road, where it would be surrounded by houses and stretch twice the height of nearby trees.
CK Hutchison Networks UK Ltd, which operates Three, submitted the plans to Canterbury City Council in a bid to determine whether the authority’s approval was required for the project.
The firm said the mast was needed to make Three’s 5G service faster and able to handle more data, adding that it was “considered unlikely to have any material impact on the local area, but significant connectivity improvements”.
A Three spokesperson said: “5G rollout is vital for residents and businesses in Canterbury.
“Masts needs to be situated where people will be using the service and, in precise locations to ensure the widest breadth of coverage. We carry out extensive searches and surveys to evaluate all the options.”
But 44 people wrote to the city council objecting to the plans, branding the mast “unsightly and inappropriate” and arguing it would “blight [a] pleasant open space”.
Resident Denis Linfoot expressed fears that the pole’s “extraordinary” height and location “on the best tourist route into Canterbury” would
inflict “significant and permanent damage” on the city and its economy.
Canterbury Heritage Design Forum also objected, saying the structure would be “intrusive and out of keeping with the adjacent conservation area and the World Heritage Site status of the city”.
Council planning officers have now refused the proposal.
In decision documents, senior planning officer Kelly Tonkin said the mast would be “an alien and prominent form of development which would result in harm to the character of the street scene”.
She added: “The applicant has also failed to demonstrate that the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on views of the World Heritage Site.”