Mobile phone mast plan refused amid land ownership confusion
Councillors have refused permission for a 20-metre 5G phone mast in Monifieth following confusion over who owns the land.
An application seeking approval to build a mast within a yard on Riverview Drive was lodged by EE and Hutchison 3G UK Ltd in March. The proposal is a replacement for a 25m mast which was removed from the grounds of the former Ashludie Hospital in November 2017.
The application recently went before Angus Council’s development standards committee. Council officers had recommended approval, but during the meeting a potential issue regarding the ownership of the land emerged.
Businessman Kenny Watson revealed he was in the process of purchasing the land from Angus Council with the intention of building a padel court on the site.
He said: “The intention is to bring forward proposals for a new padel facility which will provide valuable sporting resources for local schools, community groups, and the wider Angus area.
“The planning and layout of a modern sports facility cannot be considered in isolation from a permanent mobile infrastructure compound positioned within it.”
However, planning officers detailed that land ownership is not a material planning consideration.
They also said the land was still under council ownership and no other planning applications had been lodged.
Councillor Bill Duff said: “It’s a bit of a mess. We’ve got someone who says they’re trying to buy the land, so the reality is the council will decide what’s going to happen. If it wants to sell the land to Mr Watson, it will do that. If it wants to sell the land to the mobile phone company, it will do that.
“But we’ve got a planning application in front of us, and the ownership of the land is irrelevant. If you want to use a mobile phone, you’re just going to have to accept there have to be masts and this seems as good a location as any.”
However, Scottish Conservative councillor Craig Fotheringham said: “There will be significant visual amenity impacts on the surrounding parks and residential area and neighbouring properties.”
Councillors voted to refuse the application, with two in favour, eight against and one no vote.